1 2026:CGHC:23294 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2565 of 2026 1 - Umesh Kumar Yadav Shri Jeevardhan Yadav Aged About 39 Years R/o Dabhripani Village -Bandhiyachuwan, Tahsil Ambikapur District Sarguja C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue New Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Secretary Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan,atal Nagar New Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector Cum Chairperson,district Level Committee Constituted Under The Schedule Tribes And Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition Of Forest Rights) Act 2006 District Sarguja, Ambikapur (C.G.) 4 - The Division Forest Officer Sarguja Forest Division At Ambikapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) 2 5 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Forest) Sub Division -Ambikapur District Sargija (C.G.) 6 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.) Cum Chairperson Sub Divisional Level Committee Constituted Under The Shedule Tribes And Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition Of Forest Rights )act 2006, Sub Division -Ambikapur District Sarguja (C.G.) 7 - The Forest Range Officer ,forest Range-Ambikapur District Sarguja (C.G.) 8 - The Secretary Gram Panchayat Bandhiyachuwan, Mohalla Dabripani Tahsil Ambikapur District Sarguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.N. Bhakta alongwith Mr. Vivek Bhakta, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/05/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case from the authorities concerned for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside / quash the 3 impugned eviction / dispossession notice dated 17.03.2026 (AN P-1) issued by the Division forest officer, forest division Ambikapur District Sarguja (Resp No.04), and the Petitioner be allowed to reside at the suit property / house (Reserved Forest compartment No. 2582, area about 0.167 dismil/ hectare) in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to permit the petitioner to make application/representation for grant of Vanbhoomi Adhikar Certificate before the authority for consideration, in the interest of justice. 10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass any other relief, which this Hon'ble High Court deems fit and proper be also awarded. 2. Facts of the case, as projected in the petition, are that the petitioner belongs to District Sarguja, an area predominantly inhabited by aboriginal/tribal communities. The petitioner claims that his family has been residing over the disputed land for the past 40–50 years and is in long-standing, peaceful possession thereof. It is further averred that there are no forest trees standing on the said land for a considerable period of time and the petitioner’s family has constructed a small residential house (Makan Badi) on the land, where they have been continuously residing. The petitioner also asserts that he is a landless 4 (आवासहीन) person and has no alternative accommodation. Despite such settled possession, the respondent authorities have initiated dispossession/demolition proceedings by issuing notice dated 17.03.2026 (Annexure P-1), which has given rise to the present writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned notice dated 17.03.2026 initiating dispossession and demolition proceedings is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the material available on record. It is contended that the petitioner and his family have been in peaceful possession of the land for more than four to five decades, and such long-standing possession has not been taken into consideration by the authorities. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a landless person and the house constructed on the disputed land is the only shelter available to him and his family. The action of the respondents in initiating demolition proceedings without affording any opportunity of hearing and without conducting proper enquiry or verification is in violation of the principles of natural justice, as well as Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel also contends that the action of the Forest Department has been undertaken in an arbitrary and mechanical manner without appreciating the factual matrix and the petitioner’s long possession. It is argued that the petitioner has a legitimate expectation of being considered for grant of Vanbhoomi Adhikar Patta in accordance with applicable laws and policies. It is further submitted that in a 5 similar matter, the High Court of Chhattisgarh, by order dated 17.02.2026 passed in WPC No. 683/2026, has protected the possession of similarly situated persons, and therefore, the petitioner is entitled to similar protection. On these grounds, it is prayed that the impugned notice be set aside and appropriate protection be granted to the petitioner against dispossession. 4. Learned State counsel, opposing the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner, submits that the impugned action has been initiated strictly in accordance with law and after due consideration of the status of the land in question. It is contended that the petitioner has no legal right, title or interest over the disputed land so as to claim protection against the proceedings initiated by the competent authority. It is further submitted that the issue raised in the present petition is no longer res integra, as in a batch of writ petitions, including Writ Petition No. 1636 of 2026 and other connected matters, this Court has already considered and decided similar issues pertaining to occupation of forest land and action taken by the authorities. The State counsel submits that the present case stands on identical footing, and therefore, no separate adjudication is required. It is thus prayed that the present petition may be disposed of in terms of the order passed in the aforesaid batch of writ petitions, by granting similar directions, if deemed appropriate. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record, it is evident that the controversy 6 involved in the present writ petition is squarely covered by the order passed by this Court in the batch of writ petitions led by Writ Petition No. 1636 of 2026 and other connected matters, wherein identical issues relating to eviction from reserved forest land pursuant to notice dated 17.03.2026 were considered in detail. 6. In the said batch of petitions, this Court has already held that though the petitioners therein (similarly situated persons) cannot claim any vested right to continue on encroached forest land, nevertheless, being landless persons residing for a considerable period, their grievances are required to be examined in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the provisions of The Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 and the Rules framed thereunder. This Court has further directed such petitioners to approach the competent authorities as per the statutory mechanism, with a corresponding direction to the authorities to consider their claims in accordance with law and, in the meantime, not to take coercive steps. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, which are substantially similar to those dealt with in the aforesaid batch of petitions, this Court is of the considered opinion that the present petition also deserves to be disposed of in the same terms. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with the directions that the petitioner is granted liberty to approach the 7 competent authority in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Rules, 2007 or any other applicable law, for redressal of his grievance with regard to the disputed land, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In the event such an application is filed, the concerned authorities shall consider and decide the same in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in a pragmatic and reasoned manner. 9. Till such proceedings are concluded, the respondent authorities are directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner pursuant to the impugned notice dated 17.03.2026. The petitioner shall cooperate in the proceedings before the competent authority and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. 10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Madhurima