1 CGHC010286882026 2026:CGHC:32688 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3944 of 2026 Minoti Mandal S/o Late Shri Subhash Mandal Aged About 47 Years R/o Subhash Nagar, Tehsil Ambikaspur, District -Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya , Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner Surguja Division, Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub -Divisional Officer (R) Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh 5 - Tehsildar Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh 6 - Deputy Registrar Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Satish Kumar Pandey S/o Bholanath Pandey Aged About 50 Years R/o Banaras Road, T.C.P.C. Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ashish Tiwari, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. GA. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Mr. Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 29.07.2026 2 1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following reliefs: “10. Relief(s) Sought: a. To issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby quashing the impugned order dated 16.07.2026 passed by Respondent No. 3 in Revenue Proceeding No. 133/A-21/2025-26 (202606020300055) for deciding the application filed by Petitioner under Section 165(7-B) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959; and/or, b. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction thereby directing Respondent No. 3 to pass afresh order while deciding the application filed by Petitioner by taking into consideration the report(S) submitted by Respondent No. 4 and 5; and/or, c. Pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, in the facts and circumstances of the present case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in lawful possession and rightful ownership of land bearing Khasra No.248/2 area 0.420 hectare at Patwari Halka no.17, R.I.N Ambikapur - 4 Tehsil- Ambikapur; he (petitioner) has moved an application before respondent No.3/Collector under Section 165(7- B) of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (CGLRC) seeking permission to sell the portion/parcel of her land in favor of respondent No.7. Said application was received on 27.04.2022 and the concerned Collector has initiated the proceeding and called the report from the concerned Tahsildar & Sub-Divisional Officer 3 (respondent Nos.5 & 4), however, when application has not been decided, the petitioner approached before this Court by filing the writ petition (WPC No.2414/2026), which was disposed of on 14.05.2026 with a direction to the concerned Collector to decide the application of the petitioner in accordance with law within 60 days. In compliance of order of this Court’s dated 14.05.2026, the Collector has decided the application of the petitioners, however, said application has not been decided on the basis of report as filed by the concerned Tahsildar & Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue (respondent Nos.5 & 4), which were favourable to the petitioner. The Collector has passed the order rejecting the application on extraneous considerations by observing that if the petitioner is facing financial hardship, she could avail the benefits of the Government's welfare and development policies/schemes or generate the required income through agricultural activities. It has been further observed that, since the value of the land had substantially increased, grant of permission for sale might encourage other leaseholders to seek similar permission, thereby giving rise to law and order issues and disturbing peace and tranquility in the area. 3. Learned State Counsel submits that perhaps the Collector concerned could not consider the reports which has been called by him from the concerned Tahsildar & Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue (respondent Nos.5 & 4) and order Annexure P-1 has been passed only based on the possibility which was perhaps in 4 the mind of the Collector. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the writ petition and available document including the order Annexure P-1 passed by the Collector. 5. On perusal of order Annexure P-1, it appears that the provisions of Section 165(7-b) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 have not been considered by the concerned Collector in its proper perspective and in a pragmatic manner. Whenever an application seeking permission for the sale of leasehold or patta land is made, the Collector is required to examine and decide the same on the facts and circumstances of each individual case. The Collector cannot proceed on the presumption that, if permission is granted in one case, other patta holders may also be induced or compelled to alienate their lands in future. Every application must be considered on its own merits. Where specific grounds are urged in support of such application, the proper course for the Collector is to obtain the necessary reports from the competent Revenue Authorities, ie, (Tahsildar and the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue). Upon receipt of such reports, the Collector shall consider the same and pass a reasoned order based thereon, uninfluenced by any extraneous or irrelevant considerations. 6. Accordingly, the order dated 16.07.2026 (Annexure P-1) is hereby quashed. The concerned Collector is directed to re-consider and decide the petitioner’s application within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order strictly in accordance with 5 law and on the basis of reports submitted by the concerned Tahsildar and Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) (respondent Nos.5 and 4), by which, the concerned authorities after due examination have filed the reports stating that the land was granted in patta and after sale of a portion of land, the petitioner is having land of about 0.122 hectares; they have also recommended for grant of permission in favour of the petitioner as there is no violation of provision contained under Section 165 (7-b) of the CGLRC, 1959. The co-owners have also given consent to sale the land in question. The value of the land is also rightly been determined. While reconsideration, the Collector shall adopt a pragmatic approach, give due regard to the provisions contained in Section 165(7-b) of the CGLRC, consider the genuine requirements of the petitioner and also take into account the fact that even after the proposed sale of the aforesaid portion of land, the petitioner would continue to retain sufficient land for her livelihood. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge J.