1 2026:CGHC:26688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1865 of 2026 M/s Mivaan Steels Ltd. (Formerly Known As Monnet Ispat And Energy Limited) A Company Registered Under The Companies Act, 1956/2013, Having Its Registered Office At Jsw Centre, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai-400051 Through Its Authorized Representative, Mr. B.B.Behra, Address. Village-Kurud, Chandkhuri Marg, Mandir Hasaud, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Commissioner, Raipur Division Dist. Raipur, (C.G.) 2 - Additional Collector, Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Tehsildar, Mandir Hasaud, Tehsil Mandir Hasaud, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Revenue Inspector, Mandir Hasaud, Dist.Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Kasturi Lal Sharma, S/o Shri Moolraj Sharma, R/o Jal Vihar Colony Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Singhal, Advocate For State/Respondents No.1 to 4 : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Deputy Advocate General For Respondent No.5 : Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocate along with Mr. Chakresh Tiwari, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 30.06.2026 1. By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls in question the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the learned YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.06.30 18:26:20 +0530 2 Commissioner, Raipur Division, Raipur, whereby the revision preferred by the petitioner under Section 50 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, ‘the CGLRC’) against the demarcation proceedings has been rejected. The petitioner also assails the consequential demarcation report dated 30.08.2024 and the order dated 03.09.2024 passed on the basis thereof, principally contending that the demarcation was conducted without re-establishing the permanent boundary marks (Chanda- Munaara) and was instead based upon the boundaries of neighbouring survey numbers, which, according to the petitioner, is contrary to the prescribed procedure and has resulted in an illegal determination of the boundaries of the disputed land. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass a writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the order dated 23.03.2026 passed by the Respondent No. 1/learned Commissioner, Raipur Division, in the Revision Case No. 202502970100035/A- 12/2024-25 titled "M/s Mivaan Steels Ltd. vs. Kasturi Lal Sharma"; 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass a writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the demarcation report dated 30.08.2024 prepared by Respondent No. 4; and 10.3 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, may also kindly be granted.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present case can be effectively resolved if a fresh demarcation of the disputed land is directed to be conducted strictly in accordance with Section 129 read with Section 124 of the CGLRC and the Rules framed thereunder, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties. It is further submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied if such a direction is issued by this Court. 3. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for the private respondents fairly submit that they have no objection if the matter is remitted for a fresh demarcation in accordance with law after providing due opportunity of hearing to all the parties. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the nature of the controversy involved and the fair stand taken by the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately served by directing a fresh demarcation of the disputed land in accordance with law. 6. Accordingly, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Arang, District Raipur, is directed to constitute a team comprising the concerned Tahsildar, two Revenue Inspectors and two Patwaris for carrying out a fresh demarcation of the disputed land. The demarcation shall be undertaken strictly in accordance with the provisions of 4 Section 129 of the CGLRC and the Rules framed thereunder, after giving due notice and adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as all other affected parties, including respondent No.5 herein. 7. The demarcation proceedings shall be conducted in the presence of the parties. In the event any party remains absent on the date fixed, the concerned Tahsildar shall grant one further opportunity by fixing another date before proceeding further. All the parties shall extend full cooperation in the demarcation proceedings. 8. The entire exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 9. With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh