1 2026:CGHC:22100 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2329 of 2026 1 - Shekhar Soni S/o Ramlal Soni Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Ramgarh, Patwari Halka No. 17, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divsional Officer (Revenue) Mungeli District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Tahsildar Tahsil Mungeli, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Revenue Inspector Mungeli City, District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Patwari Patwari Halka No. 17 Mungeli, Tahsil And District Mungeli, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ravi Bhagat, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 11/05/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the concerned respondent authorities to decide pending revenue case No. E-Court No. 202407250600004 (parties Murari Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh) for demarcation, in pursuant to order dated 17.09.2025 passed by the learned Collector Mungeli District Mungeli Chhattisgarh, within stipulated time, in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner..” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the grievance of the petitioner is that he is the recorded joint owner and lawful title holder of lands bearing Khasra Nos. 133/2, 172/1 and 321 admeasuring 0.40 acre and 2.30 acres situated at Village Ramgarh, Patwari Halka No. 17, Tahsil and District Mungeli (C.G.), and the petitioner has been in peaceful possession and cultivation over the said lands for a considerable period of time, where he has been cultivating paddy and vegetables without any objection or dispute from any lawful 3 authority; however, certain unauthorized persons have unnecessarily started interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner and are attempting to forcibly encroach upon portions of the said lands, it is further submitted that one Murari Soni had earlier filed an application before the Tahsildar, Mungeli seeking demarcation of the land, which proceedings were disposed of vide order dated 21.06.2024, however, according to the petitioner, the demarcation was not carried out properly and in accordance with law being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Collector, Mungeli, Chhattisgarh against the order dated 21.06.2024 passed by the Tahsildar, and the learned Collector vide order dated 17.09.2025 allowed the appeal, set aside the entire demarcation proceedings conducted by the Tahsildar, and directed the authorities to undertake fresh and proper demarcation of the lands belonging to the petitioner; thereafter, the petitioner submitted an application before the concerned respondent authorities for carrying out demarcation of his lands, which came to be registered as Revenue Case No. E- Court No. 202407250600004 titled “Murari Soni Vs. State of Chhattisgarh”, however, despite pendency of the proceedings since the year 2025 and despite repeated requests made by the petitioner, the respondent authorities have failed to take effective steps for completion of the demarcation proceedings and have not finalized or decided the same till date, it is submitted that due to the prolonged and unexplained delay on the part of the 4 authorities, the petitioner is continuously facing harassment and is suffering irreparable loss as unauthorized persons are attempting to interfere with his peaceful possession and cultivation activities; according to the petitioner, the inaction of the authorities is arbitrary, illegal, and violative of the principles of natural justice, as the petitioner is being deprived of proper protection and enjoyment of his constitutionally protected property rights despite being in settled possession over the ancestral property; being aggrieved by such inaction and delay, the petitioner has approached this Hon’ble Court seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to expeditiously conduct and complete the demarcation proceedings in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the lawful recorded joint owner and possessor of the lands bearing Khasra Nos. 133/2, 172/1 and 321 situated at Village Ramgarh, Tahsil and District Mungeli, and has been peacefully cultivating paddy and vegetable crops over the said lands for several years, it is further submitted that despite the petitioner being in settled possession, certain unauthorized persons are unnecessarily creating disputes and attempting to encroach upon the petitioner’s lands, thereby compelling the petitioner to seek proper demarcation of the property through the competent revenue authorities; learned counsel further submits that although earlier demarcation proceedings were undertaken pursuant to an application filed by one Murari Soni, the same were 5 found to be defective and improper, and therefore the learned Collector, Mungeli, while exercising appellate jurisdiction, vide order dated 17.09.2025 set aside the earlier demarcation proceedings and specifically directed the authorities to conduct fresh and proper demarcation in accordance with law, however, despite such categorical directions issued by the appellate authority and despite pendency of Revenue Case No. E-Court No. 202407250600004 since the year 2025, the respondent authorities have failed to complete the demarcation proceedings till date; learned counsel contends that several memos and directions have also been issued by the Tahsildar to the concerned Revenue Inspector for carrying out demarcation, and notices were even issued requiring the parties to remain present, but no final demarcation report has yet been prepared or finalized; it is submitted that due to such inaction and delay on the part of the revenue authorities, the petitioner is suffering serious prejudice and hardship, and his peaceful possession and agricultural activities are being adversely affected; therefore, it is prayed that appropriate directions be issued to the respondent authorities to complete the demarcation proceedings expeditiously and pass consequential orders in accordance with law. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that from the documents placed on record it does not clearly appear that the demarcation proceedings have remained completely unexecuted till date, it is contended that the 6 matter requires factual verification at the level of the concerned revenue authorities and appropriate proceedings, if not already concluded, shall be undertaken in accordance with law. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, this Court deems it appropriate to direct that, in the event demarcation of the land in question has not already been conducted by the concerned respondent authorities, the Tahsildar, Mungeli shall undertake and complete the demarcation proceedings strictly in accordance with law after affording due and proper opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, and thereafter pass appropriate consequential orders in accordance with law within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat