1 CGHC010287462026 2026:CGHC:32204 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3889 of 2026 1 - Bechanram S/o Late Motiram Aged About 63 Years Resident Of Katghora, Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Korba, District Korba Chhattisgarh ... Respondent (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioner : Mr. S.R.J. Jaiswal, Advocate. For State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P.L. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 26.03.2025 (annexure P-1) passed by the Upper Commissioner Bilaspur Division Bilaspur Chhattisgarh arising out of the order dated 10.01.2024 (annexure P-2) passed by the learned Upper Collector Korba Chhattisgarh, in the interest of justice. RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.07.31 11:23:05 +0530 2 10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable in view of the availability of an efficacious alternative statutory remedy. He submits that the petitioner has the remedy of filing a revision before the Board of Revenue, which has not been availed, and therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon considering the submissions advanced, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative statutory remedy of filing a revision before the Board of Revenue, which has not been availed. In the absence of any exceptional circumstance warranting interference under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,this Court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty reserved to the petitioner to avail the alternative statutory remedy by preferring an appropriate revision before the Board of Revenue, if so advised. It is expected that, if such revision is filed, the same 3 shall be considered and decided in accordance with law preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. 6. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju