1 2026:CGHC:25819 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3056 of 2026 1 - Judawan Lal Patle S/o Bodh Ram Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Nawagaon, Post Nargoda, Thana Sipat Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Tehsil Sipat, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Tehsildar Tehsil Sipat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Sunita Rohidas D/o Late Ramlal R/o Village Nawagaon (Machkhanda), Tehsil Sipat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Sukrita Rohidas D/o Late Ramlal R/o Village Nawagaon (Machkhanda), Tehsil Sipat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 7 - Hari Rohidas S/o Pusau R/o Village Basha (Karma), Tehsil Beltara, Present R/o Village Nawagaon (Machkhanda), Tehsil Sipat, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Saket Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 24/06/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for records with regards to case of the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to restrict the private respondents from raising further constructions upon the land in possession of petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.4 That, any other relief in the discretion of this Hon'ble Court. Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances, may also be provided to the petitioner.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the complaint of the petitioner an order of stay has been passed in favour of the petitioner and the respondents were directed not to raise construction over the land in dispute by the concerned Tahsildar, Sipat, Bilaspur on 2.1.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is seeking a direction from this Court to the concerned Tahsildar, to decide the representation dated 8.6.2026 within a time frame fixed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondent-authorities to consider the pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited prayer. His pending representation will be considered in accordance with law. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy involved, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition at this stage instead of keeping the matter pending. Accordingly, the concerned Tahsildar is directed to consider and decide the representation dated 08.06.2026 submitted by the petitioner strictly in accordance with the applicable provisions of law, rules and regulations. While doing so, the Tahsildar shall also take into consideration the interim/stay order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the Tahsildar, along with all other relevant facts, 4 documents and material available on record, and shall pass a reasoned and speaking order in an objective, fair and impartial manner as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 30 days. It is further observed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application, if so advised, and in the event such an application is submitted within 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the concerned Tahsildar shall duly consider and decide the same in accordance with law, after taking into account all relevant facts and documents, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of 30 days from the date of its filing. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat