1 2026:CGHC:24223 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2617 of 2026 1 - Kaushilya Bai W/o- Kanhaiya Lal Aged About 50 Years Caste- Halba, At Present R/o- Bogatola, Tahsil Mohla, District- Mohla - Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Land Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, District Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Mohla, District Mohla- Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar, Mohla, District Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 5 - Gram Panchayat, Bogatola, Through Its Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat, Mohla, District- Mohla -Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate For State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, P.L. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 17.06.2026 VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 1. By way of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks appropriate directions to the respondent authorities to consider her representation dated 04.05.2026 for allotment/regularization of the land bearing Khasra No. 330, admeasuring 0.028 hectare, situated at Village Bogatola, Halbapara, Ward No. 9, P.H. No. 19, Tahsil and District Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, and further prays that no coercive action be taken against her till her claim is considered by the competent authority. 2. Following reliefs have been prayed by way of this petition:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to allotment of that particular land in which is petitioner is in possession i.e. Khasra No. 330 a piece of land, rakba 0.028 hectare land situated at village Bogatola under the Scheme of Rehabilitation of the State Government to the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 to decide the pending representation dated 04.05.2026 within stipulated time for redressal of the grievance of the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief, which may deem fit, in the interest of justice.” 3 3. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner is a landless woman and her family has been residing since the year 1984-85 over a portion of Government land bearing Khasra No. 330, admeasuring 0.028 hectare, situated at Village Bogatola, Halbapara, Ward No. 9, P.H. No. 19, Tahsil and District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki. It is contended that the petitioner has no other land available for residential purposes and has been peacefully residing on the said land for more than four decades. It is further pleaded that the petitioner has been paying the requisite taxes and has submitted a representation dated 04.05.2026 before respondent No. 2 seeking allotment/regularization of the land under the rehabilitation and settlement schemes formulated by the State Government. According to the petitioner, despite various circulars and policies issued by the State Government for regularization of occupation over Government land by eligible landless persons, her claim has not yet been considered. It is also apprehended that the respondent authorities may proceed to remove the petitioner from the land treating her occupation as encroachment without first considering her request for allotment or regularization. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a poor and landless lady and has been in peaceful possession of the subject land for the last 35 to 40 years. It is argued that the petitioner has no alternative accommodation or land for residence and that her case deserves consideration under the various 4 rehabilitation and regularization schemes framed by the State Government from time to time. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has already submitted a detailed representation before the competent authority on 04.05.2026 expressing her willingness to comply with all conditions and to deposit such charges or premium as may be prescribed for regularization of the land. It is contended that unless the said representation is decided, any coercive action for removal of encroachment would cause irreparable hardship to the petitioner and her family. Therefore, it is prayed that a direction be issued to the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time and, till such consideration, no coercive action be taken against her. 5. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner has an effective and efficacious remedy before the competent revenue authorities. It is submitted that the petitioner's representation is yet to be considered by the competent authority and the authority concerned shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the State has no objection if a direction is issued for consideration of the petitioner's representation within a reasonable time. However, any claim for allotment or regularization can be considered only in accordance with the applicable rules, policies and circulars governing the field. 5 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the petitioner claims to be a landless person residing on the subject land for several decades and has already submitted a representation before the competent authority seeking allotment/regularization of the land, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served by directing the competent authority to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with law rather than entering into the merits of the controversy. 8. 8. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application, along with all supporting documents, before the authority concerned within a period of fifteen (15) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event such application is filed, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, applicable Government policies, circulars and rehabilitation/regularization schemes, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 6 9. Till expiry of the aforesaid period of fifteen (15) days, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner in respect of the land in question. 10. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim and the competent authority shall take an independent decision uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. 11. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 12. No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha