1 CGHC010288432026 2026:CGHC:33111 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3997 of 2026 1 - Sushma Agrawal W/o Shri Sanjay Agrawal Aged About 48 Years Residing At D-7, D-8 D-9 Rama World, Front Hotel Petrician Raipur Road, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Municipal Corporation , Through Commissioner, District- Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Collector, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Tehsildar, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Revenue Inspector, Sirgitti, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Patwari, Halka No. 49, Mauja Parsada, Tehsil And District- Bilaspur (C.G.) VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Himanshu Kumar Sharma, Advocate For State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, P.L. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Shikhar Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31.07.2026 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to Respondents Authorities to conduct the demarcation of the land of the Petitioner, which is situated at Parsada, Pa.H.No. 49, Ra. Ni. Ma. Sirgitti, Khasara No. 390/1, Rakba 0.4900 Hectare, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, after renumbering the land in their own original sheets and Naksha/Map in accordance with law, within some stipulated period of time. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit. 10.3 Cost of the petition may also be awarded.” 2. At the outset, learned counsel for the parties submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition stands squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in WPC No. 3979 of 2026 (Sandeep Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) 3 decided on 30.07.2026. It is jointly prayed that the present writ petition may also be disposed of in terms of the observations and findings recorded therein. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgment are reproduced below:– “6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing concerned Tehsildar to demarcate the land of the petitioner as per the application filed by him within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of this order. 7. Time and again, this Court is directing revenue authorities including the concerned Tehsildar to consider the application, which are being filed by the concerned applicants in respect of the demarcation, correction of map, mutation etc., however, it appears that the concerned authorities are not acting upon the applications and are not passing the orders, due to which the petitioners are restrained to file petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only for a limited relief that the respondents/revenue authorities or other authorities may be directed to consider their application and to pass an appropriate order. 8. It is very unfortunate that for some pity reliefs which ought to have been granted by the concerned revenue authorities/other 4 authorities are forcing the petitioners to approach before this Court. Accordingly, the concerned Tehsildar is directed to consider the application filed by the petitioner and decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of passing of this order. 9.With the aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of.” 3. Since the grievance of the petitioner is identical to the one considered in WPC No. 3979 of 2026 (Sandeep Agrawal vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) decided on 30.07.2026, and the petitioner in the present case is also seeking the same relief, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of and in line with the aforesaid judgment. 4. No order as to cost(s). sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha