1 2026:CGHC:14690 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1278 of 2026 1 - Rajeshwar Paswan S/o Late Rameshwar Paswan Aged About 77 Years R/o Tulsi Awas, 6/27, Rajkishore Nagar, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Manoj Paswan R/o Rajeshwar Paswan Aged About 48 Years R/o Tulsi Awas, 6/27, Rajkishore Nagar, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Naib Tahsildar Tahsil Takhatpur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Smt. Kalawati Paswan D/o Rajeshwar Paswan, W/o Shri Satyendra Paswan Aged About 51 Years R/o Tulsi Awas, 6/15, Rajkishore Nagar, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Satyendra Paswan S/o Late Shri Sitaram Paswan Aged About 58 Years R/o Tulsi Awas, 6/15, Rajkishore Nagar, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Power Of Attorney Of Kalawati Paswan) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Bhaskar Pyashi, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 & 2 : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer. { Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi} Order on Board 24/03/2026 1. Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners seeking following reliefs :- 2 “10.1 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire case record pertaining to Case No. 202308076400028 from office of Tahsildar / Naib Tahsildar Takhatpur, District Bilaspur. 10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dt. 06/02/2024, passed by Naib Tehsildar in Case No. 202308076400028, being nullity as the same has been obtained by playing fraud which amounts to interference with process of the Court. 10.3 That the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Naib Tahsildar to conduct an independent enquiry into the authenticity of the alleged signatures of petitioners in the Vakalatnama dated 24.08.2023 by obtaining Handwriting Expert opinion etc. 10.4 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit or proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are father and brother of Respondent No. 3 whereas respondent No. 4 is Power of Attorney of respondent No. 3. He further submits that the petitioners and respondent No. 3 are having joint holding of subject land. He further submits that in pursuance of application filed by respondent No. 3 under Section 178 of the Chhattisarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for brevity, ‘Code’), Naib Tahsildar, Takhatur, District Bilaspur initiated revenue proceedings No. 202308076400028 and after filing Fard Batwarnama, passed order dated 6.2.2024 granting 1/3rd share to respondent No. 3. He next submits that in aforesaid revenue proceedings, the petitioners were neither served any notice nor they have appointed any counsel, despite that respondent No. 3 in connivance with the Revenue officials get appeared some advocate, whose name has also not been mentioned in the order sheets of said revenue case and fraudulently obtained the order dated 06.02.2024. Hence, he prays that this petition may be admitted for hearing. 3. In reply, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 & 2 submits that if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the proceeding of said revenue case or order dated 06.02.2024 passed by Naib Tahsildar, Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, then he may file appeal before concerned Sub Divisional Officer 3 (Revenue) under Section 44 of the Code, 1959. He further submits that if the petitioners wish to conduct any enquiry about alleged forged proceedings conducted by Naib Tahsildar, Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur, then he may make complaint to the concerned Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) or concerned Collector, therefore, this petition deserves to be dismissed as threshold. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is not inclined to entertain instant petition invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. However, it is made clear that if the petitioners have any grievance with regard to order dated 6.2.2024 passed by Naib Tahsildar, Takhatpur, Distrtict Bilaspur, then they may appeal under Section 44 of the Land Revenue Code and if any fraud has been committed by respondent No. 3 or any other person during proceeding of aforesaid revenue case and petitioners want any action to be taken against such arraying person, then the petitioner may file appropriate application before concerned Collector raising his grievance. 6. 6. With the aforesaid observations & directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. However, the petitioners are at liberty to take appropriate steps, as has been observed herein-above. 7. Certified copy of the impugned orders alognwith order-sheets filed by the petitioner be returned after retaining photocopy of the same. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.04.06 11:58:16 +0530 4