1 2026:CGHC:25869 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4313 of 2022 1 - Santosh Tirkey S/o Banwariram Tirkey Aged About 46 Years R/o Khasra No. 564/1, Village Karra, Tahsil Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 2 - Smt. Manti Tirkey W/o Santosh Tirkey Aged About 43 Years R/o Khasra No. 564/1, Village Karra, Tehsil Rajpur, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Rural Development, Mantralaya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector Balrampur, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sdo Revenue Block Rajpur District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner(s) :- Mr. Shakti Raj Sinha, Advocate For State :- Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Order On Board 24.06.2026 1. Heard. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the purpose of construction of a Gothan, the land in question, which has been allotted to the petitioner on lease by the Forest Department, is proposed to be taken over, and on account of the said proposed action, the petitioner has been constrained to file the present petition. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that at this stage there is no proposal, as such, for construction of a “Gothan” on the land in question. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, it is observed that learned State Counsel has stated that at present there is no proposal for construction of a “Gothan” on the land in question belonging to the petitioner. However, learned counsel for the petitioner apprehends that in case any exigency arises in future for construction of a “Gothan” over the said land, the petitioner’s rights and interest may be adversely affected. In view of the said apprehension, it is considered appropriate to observe that if at all any such proposal is initiated in future by the State authorities for construction of a 3 “Gothan” over the land in question, the competent authorities shall first issue prior notice to the petitioner, afford him an opportunity to submit his objections, and thereafter consider the same in accordance with law by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 6. It is made clear that no opinion is expressed on the merits of the matter. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. 8. No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha