1 2026:CGHC:26773 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3266 of 2026 1 - Fattelal Sahu S/o Lalaram Sahu, Aged About 46 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 2 - Goverdhan Sahu, S/o Shri Kartik Sahu Aged About 56 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 3 - Prabhuram S/o Shri Hirdram, Aged About 65 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - Basant S/o Shri Kaliram Aged About 60 Years Residence Of Village - Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 5 - Saraswati Bai W/o Late Shri Dhaniram Aged About 62 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 6 - Punit Ram Patel S/o Shri Raghunandan Aged About 68 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 7 - Pokhraj S/o Shri Johat Ram Sahu Aged About 44 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 8 - Bhupendra Sahu S/o Shri Bishat Ram Sahu Aged About 46 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.07.01 18:13:30 +0530 2 9 - Domendra S/o Dhanesh Sahu Aged About 33 Years Residence Of Village -Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District - Gariyaband (C.G.) 10 - Asan S/o Ludgu Sahu Aged About 60 Years Residence Of Village - Sursabandha, Tahsil -Rajim Block -Fingeshwar, District -Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur ( C.G.) 2 - The Collector, Gariyaband District Gariyaband (C.G.) 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer(Revenue) Gariyaband District Gariyaband (C.G.) 4 - The Tehsildar, Rajim District Gariyaband (C.G.) 5 - General Manager, District Trade And Industries Center (DTIC) /food Park, Gariyaband District Gariyaband (C.G.) 6 - Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporration Limited First Floor Industrial Bhawan, Ring Road No.1 Telibandha District- Raipur (C.G.) 7 - The Sarpanch Village Sursabandha, Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 8 - Seema Sharma, W/o Prakash Sharma Member Of Janpad Panchayat Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil - Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 9 - Ghanshyam Sahu S/o Ramkishun Sahu, Sarpanch Of Village Panchayat -Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block - Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 10 - Siteshwari Verma W/o Pueushottam Verma, Up -Sarpanch Of Village Panchayat -Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 3 11 - Jagdev Sahu S/o Dhansingh Sahu Panch Of Village Panchayat - Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 12 - Dharmendra S/o Daulat Sahu, President Of Bajranj Dal At Village Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 13 - Dukhin Bai W/o Late Mahettar Sahu, Women Commando Of Village Panchayat -Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 14 - Dukhin W/o Daniram Sahu, Women Commando Of Village Panchayat -Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block - Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 15 - Champu Sahu S/o Chhabi Sahu, Treasurer Of Village Panchayat - Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) 16 - Nandkumar Sahu S/o Gangadin Sahu Panch Of Village Panchayat -Sursabandha Resident Of Villagr -Sursabandha Block -Fingeshwar Tahsil -Rajim District -Gariyaband (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Tripathi, Advocate For State : Mr. S.S. Choubey, Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Arpit Parakh, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 01.07.2026 1. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioners call in question the legality, validity and propriety of the common dispossession notice dated 28.05.2026 issued by respondent No.4 pursuant to the order dated 15.05.2026 passed by the Tahsildar under Section 4 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, "the CGLRC"), whereby the petitioners have been directed to vacate the alleged encroached Government land situated at Village Sursabandha, Tahsil Rajim, District Gariyaband. The petitioners have prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for entire records pertaining to the dispossession notice issued by the office of respondent no. 4. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the impugned common dispossession notice dated 28.05.2026 (Annexure P-1) issued by the office of respondent no. 4. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no. 4 to 16 to do not create any hindrance upon the cultivation of crops made by petitioners for their occupied land bearing khasra no. 356, 360, 361 and 347 up the part of their possessed land which is situated at village - Sursabandha Tahsil - Rajim District - Gariyaband (C.G.). 10.4 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which deem fits by this Hon'ble Court. 10.5 Cost of the petition also given to him.” 5 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioners claim to be in possession of the subject land for the last 50–60 years and assert that they have been cultivating the same continuously. Earlier proceedings initiated for their eviction culminated in an order passed by this Court on 10.03.2026 in WPC No.1867 of 2020 and connected matters, whereby the earlier orders were quashed while granting liberty to the competent authority to initiate fresh proceedings under Section 248 of the CGLRC strictly in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Pursuant thereto, fresh proceedings were initiated and the Tahsildar passed the order dated 15.05.2026, followed by the impugned dispossession notice dated 28.05.2026, which has been assailed in the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that although the petitioners participated in the proceedings under Section 248 of the CGLRC, the authority failed to properly appreciate the objections raised by them and mechanically proceeded to pass the order dated 15.05.2026, pursuant to which the impugned dispossession notice has been issued. It is further submitted that the impugned action is arbitrary and contrary to the directions issued by this Court in its earlier order dated 10.03.2026. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel raises a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the writ petition and submits that the impugned notice dated 28.05.2026 is merely 6 consequential to the order dated 15.05.2026 passed by the Tahsildar under Section 248 of the CGLRC. It is contended that against the said order, the petitioners have an efficacious and statutory alternative remedy of appeal under Section 44(1) of the CGLRC, and therefore, the present writ petition is liable to be disposed of relegating the petitioners to avail the said remedy. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that the petitioners may be permitted to avail the statutory remedy available under Section 44(1) of the CGLRC. However, considering that the impugned dispossession notice has already been issued and the petitioners are under imminent threat of eviction, it is prayed that some interim protection may be granted so as to enable them to approach the appellate authority. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that since the order dated 15.05.2026 passed under Section 248 of the CGLRC is appealable under Section 44(1) of the said Code, the petitioners ought to avail the said statutory remedy. Accordingly, the petitioners are permitted to file an appeal under Section 44(1) of the CGLRC, along with an application for interim stay, within a period of 15 days from today. In the event such appeal along with the stay application is filed within the aforesaid period, the appellate authority shall consider and decide the same, including the prayer for interim relief, strictly in accordance 7 with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of its filing. 7. Till the appeal along with the stay application is filed within the aforesaid period and the same is considered by the appellate authority, the concerned Tahsildar as well as the other competent authorities shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioners pursuant to the order dated 15.05.2026 and the consequential dispossession notice dated 28.05.2026. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/-- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh