1 CGHC010280922026 2026:CGHC:33021 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3978 of 2026 1 - Dinesh Kurrey S/o Rambaran, Aged About 42 Years Caste Harijan, Occupation Cultivator, R/o Village Chote Salhi, Post Podi (Bachra) P.S. Khadganwa District Koriya, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan New Raipur (C.G). 2 - The Collector Of The District Manendragarh-Chirmiri-Bharatpur (C.G). 3 - The Divisional Forest Officer, Division, Baikunthpur District Koriya (C.G.). 4 - The Range Assistant/ Forester Podi Tahsil- Podi (Bachra), District Koriya (C.G.). 5 - The Tahsildar, Podi (Bachra), District Koriya (C.G.). 6 - The Gram Panchayat, Chote Salhi, Tahsil Podi (Bachra) Distt. Koriya (C.G.), Through The Sarpanch. ... Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioner : Mr. Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate. For State : Mr. Abhyuday Tripathi, P.L. RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.07.31 11:06:45 +0530 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 30/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus/certiorari or of like nature to quash the impugned orders/notices dated 23.06.2026 (P/1) & dated 20.06.2026 (P/14) with further direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner as to the allotment/settlement of subject land within the stipulated period. 10.2 That, a command/direction may kindly be issued to restrain the respondents, specifically Respondent No. 3 & 4, from taking any action for eviction/ejectment, dispossession of the petitioner from the subject land and house till the final adjudication of his claim. 10.3 Any other relief which is deemed fit and proper may also be awarded to the petitioner including cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in earlier round of litigation, this Court has considered the matter and thereafter has observed as following:- “6. Considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for respective parties, without commenting anything on merits of case of petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage permitting the petitioner to submit application before concerned authority as per provision of the Act, 2006. In the event petitioner files such application, the concerned authority shall consider and decide the 3 same in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within an outer limit of six months from the date of receipt of application.” He next submits that, pursuant to the order dated 02.11.2023 passed by this Court in WPC No. 4723 of 2023, the petitioner submitted a representation before the competent authority. However, without adjudicating upon the said representation or determining the petitioner's entitlement in terms of the directions issued by this Court, respondent No. 3, Divisional Forest Officer, Koriya Division, Baikunthpur, and respondent No. 4, Range Assistant/Forester, Podi, Tahsil Podi (Bachra), District Koriya, proceeded to pass the orders dated 23.06.2026 and 20.06.2026, respectively. It is submitted that the impugned orders have been passed in violation of the directions contained in the order dated 02.11.2023, as the respondents were first required to consider and decide the petitioner's representation and thereafter pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the present petition is premature, as the petitioner has approached this Court without submitting a reply to the notice and without producing the relevant documents required for consideration of his application. It is submitted that, from a perusal of the notice dated 23.06.2026, it is evident that the petitioner has been directed to furnish the documents mentioned therein from serial Nos. 1 to 5, and it has further been clarified that, in the event of failure to submit the 4 requisite documents and reply, the same shall be treated as an admission on the part of the petitioner. He further submits that, thereafter, in terms of Section 80-A(1) of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, the competent authority shall proceed in accordance with law, including initiation of proceedings for removal of the petitioner, if warranted. It is contended that the petitioner is required to first participate in the proceedings before the competent authority by submitting the necessary documents and reply. Only after passing of any adverse order, the petitioner may avail appropriate legal remedy. Since the petitioner has approached this Court without exhausting the available remedy, the present petition deserves to be dismissed as premature. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, it appears that the concerned authorities, vide notice dated 23.06.2026, have directed the petitioner to furnish the relevant documents, which have been specified therein, and thereafter the reply/claim of the petitioner is required to be considered in accordance with law. It is only after such consideration that the matter is required to be decided by the competent authority. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the requisite documents have already been submitted by the petitioner and, therefore, the authorities may be directed to consider the petitioner's case without insisting upon any further compliance. Having considered the notice dated 23.06.2026 (Annexure P-1) and the communication dated 5 20.06.2026 (Annexure P-14), this Court is of the view that the respondent authorities are required to examine the claim of the petitioner on the basis of the documents already submitted by him and also in the light of paragraph 6 of the order dated 02.11.2023 passed by this Court in WPC No. 4723 of 2023. 5. Accordingly, the respondent authorities are directed to consider and decide the entitlement of the petitioner in accordance with law by passing a befitting order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Till such decision is taken, the respondent authorities shall not take any coercive action against the petitioner with regard to the subject matter of the present petition. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authorities are at liberty to pass orders on merits. 7. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju