1 CGHC010289462026 2026:CGHC:32478 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3921 of 2026 Shivdarshan Netam Son Of Late Gandhiram Netam, Aged About 50 Years Caste Gond, Resident Of Village Bharritola, Tehsil Ambagarh Chowki, District Mohla -Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Land Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, District Mohla -Manpur -Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue ), Mohla District Mohla -Manpur - Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar, Mohla District Mohla -Manpur -Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Punit Ruparel, Advocate For State : Mr. Amit Nayak, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 29.07.2026 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner calling in question the inaction of the respondent authorities in not considering the petitioner's representation dated 06.07.2026 seeking allotment/regularization of Government land bearing YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.07.29 18:32:59 +0530 2 Khasra No. 296, admeasuring 0.12 acre, situated at Village Bharritola, Tahsil Mohla, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, under the State rehabilitation policy. It is submitted that the petitioner is a landless person and has been residing on the said land with his family since 1984-85. Despite the applicable rehabilitation/regularization policy and the petitioner's willingness to pay the prescribed charges, his representation remains undecided. Hence, the present petition. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s) :- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to allotment of that particular land under the Scheme of Rehabilitation of the State Government to the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 2 to decide the pending representation dated 06.07.2026 within stipulated time for redressal of the grievance of the petitioner in light of rehabilitation policy dated 14.07.2022. 10.3 Any other relief, which may deem fit, in the interest of justice.” 2. Brief facts of the case, as projected by the petitioner, are that the petitioner is a landless person and his family has been residing since the year 1984-85 over a portion of Government land bearing Khasra No. 296, area admeasuring 0.12 acre, situated at Village Bharritola, Tahsil Mohla, District Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki. 3 It is contended that the petitioner has no other land available for residential purposes and has been peacefully residing on the said land for more than four decades after being rehabilitated by the concerned Gram Panchayat. It is further pleaded that the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 06.07.2026 before respondent No.2 seeking allotment/regularization of the land under the rehabilitation and regularization schemes formulated by the State Government and has also expressed his willingness to pay the prescribed charges for such regularization. According to the petitioner, despite various circulars and policies issued by the State Government for rehabilitation and regularization of occupation over Government land by eligible landless persons, his claim has not yet been considered. It is also apprehended that the respondent authorities may proceed to remove the petitioner from the land treating his occupation as encroachment without first considering his request for allotment or regularization. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a poor and landless person and has been in peaceful possession of the subject land for the last 40 to 50 years. It is argued that the petitioner has no alternative accommodation or land for residence and that his case deserves consideration under the rehabilitation and regularization schemes framed by the State Government from time to time. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation before the competent authority on 06.07.2026 seeking allotment/regularization of the 4 land and has expressed his willingness to deposit such charges as may be prescribed under the applicable policy. It is contended that unless the said representation is decided, any coercive action for removal of the petitioner from the land would cause irreparable hardship to him and his family. Therefore, it is prayed that a direction be issued to the competent authority to consider and decide the petitioner's representation within a stipulated time and, till such consideration, no coercive action be taken against him. 4. Per contra, learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner has an effective and efficacious remedy before the competent revenue authorities. It is submitted that the petitioner's representation is yet to be considered by the competent authority and the authority concerned shall take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the State has no objection if a direction is issued for consideration of the petitioner's representation within a reasonable time. However, any claim for allotment or regularization can be considered only in accordance with the applicable rules, Government policies and circulars governing the field. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that the petitioner claims to be a landless person residing on the subject land for several decades and has already submitted 5 a representation before the competent authority seeking allotment/regularization of the land, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be served by directing the competent authority to consider the petitioner's claim in accordance with law rather than entering into the merits of the controversy. 7. 7. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner, the present petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application, alongwith all supporting documents, before the authority concerned within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event such application is filed, the authority concerned shall consider and decide the same strictly in accordance with law, applicable Government policies, circulars and rehabilitation/regularization schemes, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible. 8. Till expiry of the aforesaid period of 15 days, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive steps against the petitioner in respect of the land in question. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim and the competent authority shall take an independent decision uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. 6 10. With the aforesaid observations/directions, instant writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh