1 2026:CGHC:24896 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2945 of 2026 Ramfal Patel R/o Late Chheduram, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Thakurdeva, Police Station And Tahsil- Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Civil And Revenue District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Division Officer (Rev.)2945 Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - The Tahsildar, Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Rampyare, S/o Samaru Sahu, Caste- Teli R/o Village- Thakurdeva, Police Station And Tahsil- Pachpedi, District Bilaspur (C.G.). ... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate For respondent-State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, PL. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Mr. Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 19.06.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following reliefs: 2 “10. Relief Sought : (i) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire record from the respondent authorities: (ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to direct the Respondent No. 02/Collector Bilaspur (C.G.) may be decide the pending Complaint/the petitioner's dated 15.05.2026 (Annexure P-1), whereby direct to the revenue officer's to maintained the revenue record whereby recording the name of petitioner name of his sisters Sawan Bai, Bhawan Bai, Bhanmati and name of his mother Narmada Bai in the revenue record of land bearing Khasara Nos.104/1, 104/2, 104/3 measuring area 0.29 acre, 0.39 acre, 0.13 situated at Village- Takurdeva, Tahsil-Pachpedi, District-Bilaspur (C.G.). (iii) Any other relief, which may be deemed, fit by this Hon'ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favor of the petitioner.” 2. Learned State Counsel on instruction submits that as per direction passed by the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer by its order dated 25.04.2022, the concerned Tahsildar has initiated the proceedings, in which, the petitioner has also participated and, thereafter, an order dated 25.11.2024 has been passed in presence of the petitioner while mutating name of respondent No.5 in respect of land bearing Khasra No.104/2 area 0.158 hectares, as such, submission of counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has filed an application before the concerned Collector which has not been decided, is not in accordance with law as the petitioner has 3 suppressed the fact that order dated 25.11.2024 has been passed by the Tahsildar. Against the said order, neither any appeal has been preferred nor said order has been challenged any Court of law, as such, order dated 25.11.2024 attained finality. 3. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is not having proper instruction in this case as to whether order dated 25.11.2024 has been passed or not. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ petition including order dated 25.11.2024. 5. Considering facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that concerned Tahsildar has passed an order dated 25.11.2024 in presence of the petitioner while mutating name of respondent No.5 in respect of land bearing Khasra No.104/2 area 0.158 hectares, as such, application of the petitioner seems to be not in accordance with law, hence, no relief can be granted to the petitioner at this stage. 6. Accordingly, instant petition stands disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 25.11.2024 in accordance with law. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge J.