Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 24996 (CHH)

JAYNARAYAN YADAV v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/2648/2022 · 2026-07-05

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010197532022 2026:CGHC:27700 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2648 of 2022 1 - Jaynarayan Yadav S/o Late Shri Mohan Yadav Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Saketi, Police Station Hirri, Tahsil Sakri And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495222 ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, M-2-08, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 492001 2 - The Collector Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495001 3 - Sub Divisonal Officer Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495330 4 - Tahsildar Sakri Tahsil Sakri And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495003 5 - Nayab Tahsildar Sakri Tahsil Sakri And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495003 6 - Patwari Halka No. 33 Village Saketi, Tahsil Sakri And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, Pin 495003 7 - Sarwa Aadiwasi Samaj Through The President Of Sarwa Aadiwasi Samaj Saketi, Village Saketi, Police Station Hirri, Tahsil Sakri And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, 495003 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Ms. Sapna Patanwar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 Curtis Collins, Advocate For State :- Mr. Amit Nayak, P.L. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB-Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 06.07.2026 1. Learned State Counsel submits that from the perusal of the documents, it appears that the encroachment made by the petitioner has already been removed. As such, it is submitted that the present petition has become infructuous. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is still in possession of the land in question and despite the submission made by the State that from the documents it appears that the encroachment has already been removed, it is submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to avail the alternative statutory remedy available to him under law. 3. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy available to him under law. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha