1 CGHC010210332022 2026:CGHC:35950 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2837 of 2022 1 - Santosh Yadav S/o Sitaram Yadav Aged About 43 Years R/o Village - Lalpur Kala, Police Station - Kawardha, Tahsil - Bodla, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 2 - Pokhraj Sahu S/o Ramlakhan Sahu, Aged About 41 Years R/o Village - Lalpur Kala, Police Station - Kawardha, Tahsil - Bodla, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector, Kabirdham, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bodla, District - Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Bodla, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Chandrikaditya Pandey, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Abhyuday Tripathi, P.L. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13/08/2026 1. By way of this petition, following reliefs have been prayed:- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records of the case of the petitioners for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ or order or direction to respondent authorities to stop the process in furtherance of the notice dated 08.06.2022 and 24.06.2022 and the impugned notices may kindly be set-aside. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass an order directing the respondent authority to not evict the petitioners and other agriculturist from the land which has been made useful after receiving the same from the Government. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief / reliefs in favour of the petitioners, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case,including awarding the cost of petition to the petitioners.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been preferred challenging the notice dated 08.06.2022, whereby the land described therein has been directed to be put to 3 auction for carrying out agricultural operations over the same. It is submitted that the petitioners are in possession and are cultivating the said land pursuant to the allotment granted in their favour on payment of rent, which they have been regularly depositing. Learned counsel further submits that, despite the subsistence of such allotment and payment of rent by the petitioners, the respondent authorities have issued the impugned notice proposing auction of the very same land for agricultural operations, which is arbitrary, unjustified and not in accordance with law. 3. Learned State counsel submits that such notices are being issued by the respondent authorities at periodic intervals with a view to providing an opportunity to interested persons to participate in the auction process for allotment of the land for agricultural purposes. It is further submitted that the land would be allotted to the highest eligible bidder in accordance with the prescribed procedure and for agricultural purposes. Therefore, the issuance of the impugned notice is in accordance with the applicable procedure and does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on 4 record, it is not in dispute that, by order dated 29.06.2020, the auction proceedings in respect of the land in question had already been stayed by this Court. 6. In view of the aforesaid order and considering the fact that the impugned notice dated 04.06.2022 has, by efflux of time, lost its efficacy and has become redundant, no useful purpose would be served by examining the legality of the said notice on merits. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy and keeping all questions of law and fact open, the present petition is allowed. 7. However, it is made clear that this order shall not preclude the competent Tehsildar from issuing a fresh notice for auction of the land in question, if so permissible in accordance with law. In the event any fresh auction notice is issued, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the competent authority and participate in the auction proceedings, subject to depositing/maintaining the requisite bidding amount in accordance with the applicable terms and conditions. 8. In case the petitioner participates in the fresh auction proceedings, the competent Tehsildar shall consider the petitioner's bid in accordance with law and take an appropriate decision strictly in accordance with the prescribed procedure. 9. With the aforesaid liberty and observations, the present petition stands disposed of. 5 10. No opinion is expressed on the merits of the respective claims of the parties. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge vishakha