1 CGHC010088112023 2026:CGHC:36052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1420 of 2023 Vikas Kushwaha S/o Chaturi Kushwaha Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Bhala, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Tahsildar Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Incharge Police Chowki, Vijaynagar, Police Station Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Mohan Sao S/o Vishwanath Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Bhala, P.O. Vijay Nagar, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Sitesh S/o Harivansh Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Bhala, P.O. Vijay Nagar, Tahsil Ramanujganj, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For the Petitioner :Mr. RV Ram Rajwade, Advocate For the State For Respondent Nos.5 and 6. : : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, PL Ms. Preeti Yadav, Advocate 2 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with following reliefs: “Reliefs Sought: 10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records pertaining to the case from the respondent authorities. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 07.12.2022 and impugned dispossession warrant (Annexure P/1) and further be pleased to direct the respondents not to remove the house of petitioner pursuant to impugned order and impugned dispossession warrant. 10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the claim of petitioner for settlement of aforesaid government land, in accordance with policy of the State Government. 10.4 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in occupation of the government land since long back, he has constructed a house upon the land and residing alongwith his family, however, impugned notice for eviction has been issued to him on 07.12.2022 by the concerned Tahsildar in the revenue proceeding. Since, the petitioner is in occupation of land in 3 question since long back, which is admittedly a government land, as such, the concerned Authorities may be directed to consider the claim of the petitioner for settlement of alleged government land as per the policy of the State Government. Learned Counsel further contended that vide order dated 27.03.2023, this Court had granted interim protection to the petitioner by restraining the respondents from taking any coercive steps for his dispossession from the land in question. 3. Learned State Counsel, on the other hand, submits that mere long-standing possession over the government land does not confer any vested or indefeasible right upon the petitioner to seek settlement or allotment of the land in his favour, as such, writ petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the relief sought for by the petitioner including impugned notice. 5. Upon consideration of the relief sought by the petitioner for settlement of the land in question in accordance with the policy of the State Government, this Court finds that although the petitioner does not possess any vested right to seek settlement of the government land in his favour, nevertheless, having regard to the fact that the petitioner claims to be in long-standing possession thereof and has constructed a residential house over the said land, it would be appropriate to direct the competent respondent 4 authorities to consider and decide the petitioner’s claim for settlement in accordance with law and the applicable policy of the State Government. 6. Accordingly, the concerned respondent authorities are directed to pass an appropriate order upon the petitioner’s claim within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion or pass any order on the merits of the case. 8. Till expiry of the aforesaid period of 60 days, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in terms of the interim order dated 27.03.2023 passed by this Court. 9. With the above observations/directions, instant petition stands disposed of. CC as per rules. Sd/- SD (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge J.