1 CGHC010323422026 2026:CGHC:37534 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4358 of 2026 1 - Ashok Kumar Ubhrani S/o Lt. Shri Sevak Ram, Aged About 73 Years Resident Of Village Torwa, Tehsil And District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Meena Motwani Wife Of Late Shri Dularam Motwani Aged About 65 Years Resident Of Near Sai Mandir, Matra Chhaya Niwas, Torwa Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Varsha Motwani Wife Of Shri Narendra Motwani, Aged About 44 Years Resident Of Near Sai Mandir, Matra Chhaya Niwas, Torwa Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Bhawna Motwani Wife Of Shri Mahendra Kumar Motwani, Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Near Sai Mandir, Matra Chhaya Niwas, Torwa Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Sakshi Motwani, Wife Of Shri Rajendra Kumar Motwani, Aged About 40 Years Resident Of Near Sai Mandir, Matra Chhaya Niwas, Torwa Bilaspur, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Commissioner, Bilaspur Division Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Tehsildar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.08.21 17:37:20 +0530 2 (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Ms. Pratibha Sahu, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 21.08.2026 1. By filing the present petition, the petitioners call in question the continued inaction on the part of the respondent authorities, particularly the Tahsildar, Bilaspur, in implementing the order dated 29.05.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur in Appeal Case No. 112/A-70/2010-11. By the said order, the Commissioner set aside the orders passed by the Tahsildar and the Sub-Divisional Officer and directed the Tahsildar to conduct proper demarcation of the disputed land, afford adequate opportunity of hearing and evidence to both parties and thereafter decide the matter on merits. The petitioners have prayed for following relief(s) :- “i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition; ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, particularly in the nature of, directing Respondent No. 4/Tahsildar, Bilaspur to forthwith implement and comply with the final order dated 29.05.2011 passed by Respondent No. 2/Commissioner, 3 Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur in Appeal Case No. 112/A-70/2010-11; iii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No. 4 to conduct and complete proper demarcation/measurement of the subject land bearing Khasra Nos. 453/1 and 454/1, total area 0.206 hectare, situated at Village Torwa, Patwari Halka No. 22, Tehsil and District Bilaspur, in accordance with law and the directions contained in the order dated 29.05.2011; iv. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct Respondent No. 4 to complete the aforesaid entire exercise within a fixed period, preferably within 60 days from the date of production of the certified copy of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court; v. Any other relief deemed fit in the interest of justice. That, an affidavit in support of the petition is filed herewith.” 2. The dispute relates to land bearing Khasra Nos. 453/1 and 454/1, admeasuring 0.206 hectare, situated at Village Torwa, Patwari Halka No. 22, Tehsil and District Bilaspur. The petitioner had purchased the land by registered sale deed dated 20.10.1970 and alleged unauthorized interference and construction by the respondent over the subject land, leading to proceedings under Section 250 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959. The Tahsildar, by order dated 17.09.2009, directed restoration of possession, which was subsequently set aside by the Sub- 4 Divisional Officer on 30.12.2009. The petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal before the Commissioner, who, vide order dated 29.05.2011, found demarcation and proper inquiry necessary and issued consequential directions to the Tahsildar. 3. Ms. Pratibha Sahu, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that pursuant to the order dated 29.05.2011 passed by the Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, the petitioners had moved an application before the competent revenue authority seeking demarcation of the subject land. Although a copy of the said application is not presently available with the petitioners, learned counsel, on instructions, submits that the application was filed shortly after passing of the order dated 29.05.2011. However, despite the lapse of considerable time, the said application has neither been considered nor has the demarcation directed by the Commissioner been carried out. It is submitted that the order dated 29.05.2011 continues to remain operative and has neither been stayed, modified nor set aside by any competent Court. 4. Per contra, Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, learned State counsel submits that unless the petitioners are able to produce or establish the filing of an application for demarcation, it cannot be presumed that such an application was actually filed before the competent authority. It is further submitted that the order in question was passed as far back as on 29.05.2011 and the subsequent developments are not clearly borne out from the 5 documents annexed with the petition. Learned State counsel submits that, in such circumstances, the concerned revenue authority may not presently be in a position to act upon an application which, according to the petitioners, was filed in the year 2011. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and, particularly, the fact that the order dated 29.05.2011 specifically directed the Tahsildar, Bilaspur to undertake proper demarcation of the subject land and thereafter proceed in accordance with law, this Court is of the considered view that the controversy can appropriately be resolved by directing the petitioners to submit a fresh application before the competent revenue authority. The petitioners shall annex with such application a certified copy of the order dated 29.05.2011. In case the demarcation directed by the said order has not yet been carried out, the competent authority shall consider the fresh application and initiate demarcation proceedings, after issuing due notice to all concerned/interested parties, in accordance with the directions contained in the order dated 29.05.2011, the provisions of Section 129 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 and the rules framed thereunder. 6 7. Since the petitioners are being permitted to file a fresh application, they shall do so within 10 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order. Upon such application being filed, if the demarcation pursuant to the order dated 29.05.2011 has not already been undertaken, the competent authority shall consider the application and complete the demarcation proceedings and pass an appropriate order, in accordance with law, within a stipulated period. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the dispute between the parties. 9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 10. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh