1 2026:CGHC:26074 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3175 of 2026 1 - Santosh Soni S/o Pannalal Soni Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Dantewada Tahsil Dantewada District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster ( Apda) Management Department Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, Distt - Raipur, Chhattigarh. 2 - The Collector Dantewada District Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Sdo ( Revenue) Dantewada District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Tahsildar Tahsil Dantewada, District South Bastar Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Municipal Council Dantewada Distt. South Bastar Dantewada Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate. For State : Shri Anadi Sharma, PL. SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 25/06/2026 1. This Writ Petition has been filed against the eviction warrant dated 18.06.2026 (Annexure P/1) issued by the Tehsildar Dantewada, District South Baster Dantewada Chhattisgarh directing petitioner to vacate his AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.06.25 19:22:19 +0530 2 encroachment upon the subject land within seven days. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in possession of the land situated at village Dantewada PHN No.3, Tehsil Dantewada District South Baster Dantewada in Khasra area 71.40 square meter out of Khasra No.257/1, comprising total area of 4.855 hectares. He submits that without affording opportunity of hearing, eviction warrant has been issued by the respondent authorities. He submits that petitioner is residing over the subject property for 30-40 years, and if their possession is taken away they will suffer irreparable loss. He submits that vide order dated 10.02.2026 passed by the Tehsildar an eviction order has been issued against the petitioner, as the land in question was reserved for the Press Union. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dantewada, which also got dismissed. Against the order of SDO (Revenue), the petitioner has preferred the appeal before the Collector, South Baster, which is lying pending. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submits that his appeal is pending before the Collector Dakshin Baster, as such, this Writ Petition may be disposed of with a direction to the Collector to decide the said appeal in an expeditious manner. 4. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, without commenting anything on the merits of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the Collector concerned to the decide 3 the appeal of the petitioner within 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Ordered accordingly. 5. Till the appeal is decided, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner with regard to subject property. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Avinash