Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15272 (CHH)

VINOD LODHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/81/2026 · 2026-01-08

Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:1382 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 81 of 2026 1 - Vinod Lodhi S/o Rohit Lodhi Aged About 35 Years R/o Village- Tendua, Tahsil- Nandghat, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Bemetara, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue) Nawagarh, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Tahsildar Nandghat, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 4 - Vijay Upadhyay Ex-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Tendua, Tahsil- Nandghat, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Revenue Inspector Smbalpur, Tahsil- Nandghat, District : Bemetara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vipin singh Thakur, Advocate. For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 09/01 /2026 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India assailing order dated 06.10.2025 issued by respondent No. 3/ Tahsildar, Nandghat, District- Bemetara by which proceeding under Section 248 of the Land Revenue Code, 1959 has been initiated against the petitioner for removal of encroachment of house constructed by the petitioner in land bearing Khasra No. 1189 situated at Village- Tendua, Tahsil- Nandghat., District- Bemetara. 2. In view of remedy of appeal available to the petitioner, it is directed that the petitioner shall prefer appeal before the appellate authority for redressal of grievance within 30 days from the date of receipt of copy ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Digitally signed by ARUN KUMAR DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.09 15:44:20 +0530 2 of this order. In the eventuality of filing of appeal by the petitioner, neither the appellate authority nor the respondents will take a plea of limitation and will decide the appeal on its own merits. 3. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. 4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the contentions raised by the parties and it is for the authorities to decide appeal preferred by the petitioner on its own merits. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge Arun