1 CGHC010284202026 2026:CGHC:31964 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3891 of 2026 1 - Hemlata Tiwari D/o Late Dayashankar Tiwari Aged About 38 Years R/o Ward No.4 Dantewada Tahsil And District Dantewada (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary Revenue And Disaster (Apda) Management Department Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector Dantewada District - Dantewada (C.G.) 3 - The S D O (Revenue) Dantewada District South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) 4 - The Tahsildar Tahsil Dantewada District South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.) 5 - The Chief Municipal Officer Municipal Council Dantewada Distt- South Bastar Dantewada (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Sweety Jain W/o Amit Jain Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Ward No.4 Dantewada Tahsil And District Dantewada (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vijay Shankar Mishra, Advocate For State : Mr. Sabyasachi Choubey, Panel Lawyer ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 27.07.2026 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the case. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ for directing the respondents to immediately remove the illegal encroachment from the land of the petitioner as well as government land and also cancelledthe illegal patta Bering No. Revenue Case No. 202109160100023/A-20(3)/2020-21 (Annexure P/2) & illegal residential building permit within specific time withing the a period of 30 days from the of order this Hon'ble Court. 10.3. Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.4. That, any other relief, which the petitioner is entitled and this Hon'ble court deems it fit may kindly, be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Facts of the case :- The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner not for challenging any specific order passed by the respondent authorities, but seeking appropriate directions from 3 this Hon'ble Court against the inaction and illegal action of the respondents in failing to remove the unauthorized encroachment made by respondent No. 6 over Government land admeasuring 71.40 square metres forming part of Khasra No. 257/1, having a total area of 4.8550 hectares. The petitioner further seeks a direction for cancellation of the allegedly illegal patta granted in favour of respondent No. 6 in Revenue Case No. 202109160100023/A-20(3)/2020-21, as well as the residential building permission purportedly issued on the basis of the said patta. According to the petitioner, despite the encroachment being over Government land and the grant of patta and building permission being contrary to law, the respondent authorities have failed to initiate any action for removal of the encroachment or for cancellation of the patta and the building permission. Aggrieved by such inaction and the consequential continuance of the alleged illegal occupation over Government land, the petitioner has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court for seeking appropriate reliefs. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has approached this Hon'ble Court in the capacity of a public-spirited whistleblower with no personal or pecuniary interest in the subject matter of the dispute. He further submits that respondent No. 6 has illegally encroached upon Government land and is raising construction thereon under the guise of a patta purportedly issued in her favour. It is contended that the said patta has been granted 4 in complete contravention of the applicable provisions of law, as respondent No.6 is not a landless person and is already in possession of 4–5 parcels of land. Learned counsel submits that a patta over Government land can be granted only to an eligible landless person, and therefore, respondent No.6 was not entitled to the grant of such patta. It is further submitted that the illegal grant of patta has facilitated the unauthorized occupation and construction over Government land, yet the respondent authorities have failed to take any effective steps either to cancel the illegally issued patta or to remove the encroachment. On the one hand, the authorities have failed to consider the objections and contentions raised by the petitioner, while, on the other hand, Respondent No. 6 has continued to raise unauthorized construction over the disputed land. It is stated that Respondent No. 6 has already completed the construction of the ground floor and is presently proceeding with the construction of the first floor. However, a objection has already been raised before the Tehsildar as well as the Collector concerned for cancellation of patta which has already been granted in favour of the Respondent No.6. Accordingly, it is prayed that appropriate directions be issued for removal of the encroachment and for cancellation of the illegal patta and all consequential permissions granted in favour of respondent No. 6. 4. Learned counsel for the State submits that if it is found that Respondent No.6 obtained the patta by practising fraud or by 5 suppressing the material fact that she was not a landless person and, therefore, ineligible for grant of patta, the matter shall be re- examined by the competent authority in accordance with law. It is further submitted that, upon such examination, if the patta is found to have been obtained illegally, fraudulently, or on the basis of forged documents, appropriate proceedings shall be initiated for its cancellation, strictly in accordance with law, after affording the patta holder a due and reasonable opportunity of hearing. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon due consideration of the submissions advanced, this Court is of the opinion that the grievance raised by the petitioner primarily relates to the alleged illegal grant of patta in favour of respondent No. 6 and the consequential unauthorized occupation over Government land. Since the petitioner has already submitted a complaint/ representation before the competent authorities seeking cancellation of the patta, this Court is not inclined to enter into the merits of the rival contentions in exercise of its writ jurisdiction at this stage. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent respondent authority to consider and decide the complaint/representation submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within a period of 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 6 6. It is further directed that, while considering the petitioner's complaint/representation, the competent authority shall examine whether respondent No. 6 was eligible for the grant of patta under the applicable provisions of law and, in particular, whether she fulfilled the requirement of being a landless person. In the event it is found that respondent No. 6 was not a landless person or that the patta was obtained by suppression of material facts, fraud, misrepresentation, or in violation of the applicable statutory provisions, the competent authority shall initiate appropriate proceedings for cancellation of the patta and take all consequential steps strictly in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all affected parties. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the allegations made by the petitioner or the defence of respondent No.6. The competent authority shall decide the matter independently, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order, and strictly in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena