1 CGHC010017122023 2026:CGHC:32595 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 319 of 2023 Rajendra Agrawal S/o Late Shri Motilal Agrawal, Aged About 56 Years, Currently Residing At Add. Flat No. 801, IRIS CHS LTD Play Ground Road, Vile Parle, East Mumbai, Maharashtra, Through His Duly Constituted Attorney Ravi Raja Aged About 44 Years S/o Late Shri K G Achari, R/o Plot No. 143, Maitri Kunj, Risali, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Rural Administration, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector, District Durg Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), District Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 - Tahsildar, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 5 - Laxmi Projects Through Its Partner Shrimati Sunita Das W/o Niranjan Das R/o Officers Colony, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Niranjan Das S/o Shri Laxmi Narayan Das R/o Officers Colony, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. SHYNA AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY Date: 2026.07.31 11:53:50 +0530 2 ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Anamika Jain, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. SS Choubey, Government Advocate and Mr. RL Rajak, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/07/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs : 10.1 Quash the impugned actions of the respondent authorities and restore the possession of the petitioner which was prior to 26.12.2022. 10.2 Direct the respondents to proceed further in accordance in Law against Respondent no.6 who without being Owner or Partner had been handed over the possession of the land being a Government. 10.3 Direct the Concerned respondent authorities to proceed further in accordance in Law against Erring Officers involved in benifitting the Respondent no.6 for such primafacie misgivings and unlawful acts carried by the responsible officers depriving the likes of petitioner of their fundamental rights. 10.4 Any other relief as deemed fit by this Hon’ble Court in circumstances of this case. 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner has directly challenged the order passed by the Tehsildar instead of filing an appropriate appeal under Section 44(1) of the CG Land Revenue Code. 3 3. At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this petition in order to pursue the alternative remedy. 4. In view of the above, the Petition is dismissed as withdrawn. However, the petitioner is at liberty to avail the alternative remedy available under the law. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Shyna Ajay