1 2026:CGHC:14139 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1292 of 2026 Malik Ram Parkar S/o Dhursai Parkar Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Akaltari Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, District Bilaspur, C.G. 2 - Tahsildar Beltara, District Bilaspur, C.G. 3 - Naib Tahsildar Beltara, Tehsil Beltara, District Bilaspur, C.G. 4 - Revenue Inspector Nagoi, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, C.G. 5 - Rajkumar Suryawanshi S/o Shri Ramayan Lal Suryawanshi Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Akaltari Police Station Ratanpur, District Bilaspur, C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Gajanand Ratre and Mr. Prabhat Kumar Kaneri, Advocates For Respondents 1 to 4/State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 24.03.2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging order dated18.02.2026 (Annexure-P/1) passed by Naib Tahsildar, Beltara, Distt. Bilaspur. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of some dispute, demarcation had earlier been carried out and spot inspection was also carried out by the revenue authorities, wherein, it was reported that no BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.03.25 17:45:24 +0530 2 encroachment has been made by the petitioner on the land of respondent No.5. The said order was challenged by respondent No.5 by filing writ petition bearing WPC No.2004/2021, which was disposed of by the Coordinate Bench vide Order dated 21.3.2025, directing respondent No.5 (petitioner therein) to file appear before Superior Revenue Authority, however, respondent No.5, by concealing the aforesaid fact, fraudulently got second demarcation report in his favour, on the basis of which he obtained impugned order. As such, impugned order suffers from grave perversity and illegality. Hence, it is prayed that this petition may be admitted for hearing. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that impugned order is appealable under Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, (for short ‘the Code 1959’), therefore, this petition is not maintainable. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. The Order dated 08.8.2025 has been passed by Naib Tahsildar, Beltara in Revenue Case No.202506076300031/A-70/2024-25, whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove the encroachment. If there is any perversity or illegality in the said order, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all such grounds before the Superior Revenue Authority by filing appeal under Section 44 of the Code 1959. Since, an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, I am not inclined to entertain this petition invoking extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court. 6. However, considering that the eviction Notice dated 18.02.2026 (Annexure-P/1) has been issued by respondent No.3/ Naib Tahsildar, the effect and operation of impugned notice dated 18.02.2026 (Annexure-P/1), shall remain stayed for a period of 15 days from today. During this period, the petitioner may file an appeal before the Superior Revenue Authority and 3 seek appropriate relief. It is made clear that if the petitioner fails to file the appeal within 15 days from today, then this interim protection shall lose its efficacy. 7. With aforesaid observations and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. 8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini