1 2026:CGHC:22694 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2075 of 2026 Pramod Kumar Sahu S/o Syam Sunder Sahu Aged About 25 Years Village Darra, Tahsil Tundra, Police Station - Gidhauri, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Superintendent Of Police, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 4 - Sub Divisional Magistrate Sub Division Kasdol, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 5 - Tahsildar, Tahsil - Gidhauri, Distt. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) 6 - Station House Officer Police Station Gidhauri, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) 7 - Incharge Police Outpost- Giraudhpuri, Police Station - Gidhauri, Distt. Balodabazar - Bhatapara (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate For State : Ms. Anushka Naik, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.05.2026 1 By filing the present petition, the petitioner assails the action of the respondent authorities in illegally sealing the petitioner’s lodge without supplying any order, notice or document in relation thereto YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.05.14 10:17:58 +0530 2 and without affording any opportunity of hearing, thereby allegedly violating the principles of natural justice as well as the fundamental rights guaranteed to the petitioner under the Constitution of India. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “(i) Issue a appropriate writ calling for the records of action taken by the respondent no. 4 and sealing the lodged of the petitioner on 15.04.2026; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondents to forthwith de-seal / remove the seal from the Petitioner's lodge Laxmi Lodge and Palace situated at Manakoni Rod, Village Darra, Tahsil Tundra, Distt. Balodabazar- Bhatapara(C.G.) and restore possession to the Petitioner; (iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents to return the illegally seized documents of petitioner's lodge, computer and CCTV to the petitioner; (iv) Issue a writ of mandamus directing Respondents Respondents to pay compensation of ₹5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lakhs only) to the Petitioner for illegal detention, harassment and loss of business. (v) Pass any other order the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice.” 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is proprietor of “Laxmi Lodge and Palace” situated at Manakoni 3 Road, Village Darra, Tahsil Tundra, District Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.). It is submitted that the said lodge is duly licensed and is the sole source of livelihood of the petitioner and his family. The petitioner has been peacefully operating the lodge for the last several years, mainly catering to pilgrims visiting the holy place of Giraudhpuri. It is further submitted that the petitioner regularly complied with all requirements of the local administration and police authorities, including submission of the register of visitors staying at the lodge before the concerned Police Outpost. 3 Learned counsel further submits that respondent No.3, namely the concerned Sub-Inspector/Incharge of Police Outpost Giraudhpuri, started demanding illegal gratification from the petitioner on monthly basis for smooth operation of the lodge and upon refusal by the petitioner, the respondent authorities started continuously harassing him. It is submitted that the petitioner was compelled to daily produce the register of visitors before the Police Outpost and on 06.04.2026, when the petitioner visited the Police Outpost in compliance of such directions, he was abused, threatened and thereafter illegally detained by the police authorities without there being any FIR or cognizable offence registered against him. According to learned counsel, the petitioner was wrongfully confined for several hours and later released after issuance of a notice under Sections 170/126 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. It is further submitted that thereafter the respondent authorities illegally seized the lodge 4 register, documents, computer system and CCTV storage devices and also forced the visitors staying in the lodge to vacate the premises. Aggrieved by such illegal acts and harassment, the petitioner submitted written complaints/representations before the higher authorities specifically alleging illegal demand of money and misuse of authority by respondent No.3 and other officials concerned. 4 Learned counsel lastly submits that on 15.04.2026, respondent No.4/Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sub Division Kasdol, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara without issuing any show-cause notice, without granting any opportunity of hearing, without recording reasons and without supplying any written order to the petitioner, illegally sealed the petitioner’s lodge. It is submitted that the action of sealing the lodge has been taken in a wholly arbitrary and mala fide manner only to pressurize the petitioner and is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and the petitioner’s fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution of India. It is further submitted that the lodge is the only source of livelihood of the petitioner and his family and the petitioner is also under financial liability towards repayment of loans obtained for running the said business. Therefore, the impugned action of the respondent authorities deserves to be quashed. 5 On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and submits that 5 the present writ petition is misconceived, devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed. It is submitted that the petitioner has suppressed material facts and has not approached this Court with clean hands. Learned State counsel submits that during inspection of the petitioner’s lodge, several irregularities and suspicious activities were allegedly found, pursuant to which proceedings were initiated by the competent authority and notice dated 15.04.2026 was issued to the petitioner calling upon him to submit his explanation. It is further submitted that the petitioner appeared before the competent authority and subsequently submitted his reply during pendency of the present petition. Therefore, according to learned State counsel, no final action has yet been taken and the proceedings are still pending consideration before the competent authority. It is also submitted that proceedings regarding alleged encroachment over government land are separately pending against the petitioner before the revenue authorities. 6 Learned State counsel further submits that the allegations regarding demand of illegal gratification by the police officials are false and baseless. It is thus contended that since the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy to participate in the pending proceedings before the competent authority, no interference is warranted by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned State counsel lastly submits that since the proceedings pursuant to notice dated 15.04.2026 are pending 6 before the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), an appropriate direction may be issued to the said authority to consider and decide the proceedings by passing a reasoned order in accordance with law within a stipulated time frame. 7 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8 Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court finds that proceedings pursuant to the notice issued by respondent No.4/Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) are already pending consideration before the competent authority and no final order has yet been passed in the matter. Therefore, at this stage, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the controversy while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9 Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to participate in the pending proceedings and file appropriate reply/additional documents before the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), if not already filed. Upon such reply being submitted, the concerned respondent No.4/Sub Divisional Magistrate, Balodabazar- Bhatapara (C.G.) shall consider the same and pass appropriate reasoned order strictly in accordance with law after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 10 It is further observed that during pendency of the present writ petition, if the petitioner files an appropriate application seeking 7 interim relief before the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) within a period of one week from today, the said authority shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a reasonable time, in accordance with law. 11 It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 12 With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh