1 CGHC010317742026 2026:CGHC:38320 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4433 of 2026 1 - Smt. Sharda Digraskar W/o Late Subhash Digraskar Aged About 77 Years R/o Chantapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 - Renuka Digraskar D/o Late Subhas Digraskar Aged About 51 Years R/o Chantapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector District Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Nazul Officer Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Rishipal Singh Reader, O/o Nazul Officer, Bilaspur (C.G.) Through Nazul Officer, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Shekhar Digraskar S/o Late Subhash Digraskar Aged About 50 Years R/o Chantapara, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Morris Rodney Martinz S/o Cragie Martinz Aged About 18 Years R/o L-5, Vinoba Nagar, Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Sunil Kumar Soni, Advocate ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 31.08.2026 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for appropriate relief in respect of the grievance raised in the petition. “1. Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any Other Appropriate Writ/Direction, Calling for the Records of Revenue Case No. 202305074700018/A-6/2022-23 and Quash the order Dated 06.10.2023 Passed by the Respondent No.03 i.e., Nazul Officer, Bilaspur (C.G) as it is Void, Nullity and Non- Est in the Eyes of law, having been Obtained by Fraud/ Tampering in the Court Record. 2. Direct, Respondent No.03 i.e., Nazul Officer, Bilaspur (C.G) to hear the Mutation matter Afresh After Impleading the Petitioners and all Legal Heirs and Pass a Fresh Order Strictly in Accordance with the Registered Will Dated 02.06.2022. Especially Main Rakba Ought to have been Recorded in the Name of Original Pattadhari i.e., Subhash Digraskar Since Mutation of the Flats are Solely Covered under the Prakosth Swamitva Adhiniyam. It is beyond the Competence of the Nazul Officer to Record the Original Area which is not bequeathed to any one by way of will. 3 3. Direct, Respondent No.1 Collector, District Bilaspur (C.G) to Initiate Disciplinary Proceedings and an Inquiry Against the Erring Officials who are Responsible for Tampering with Official Records (Tampering of Records.) 4. Pass any other Order, or Direction which this Hon'ble Court Deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has already submitted a representation before the competent Collector under the provisions of the Revenue Book Circular, which is pending consideration since 20.04.2026. It is submitted that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the purpose of filing the present petition would be served if a direction is issued to the concerned Collector to consider and decide the said representation in accordance with law, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after taking into consideration the documents placed on record by the petitioner. 3. Learned State counsel has no objection to the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record, including the representation dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P/4). 5. Considering the nature of the grievance raised and the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court 4 is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be served by directing the concerned Collector, Bilaspur to consider and decide the representation dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P/4), submitted by the petitioner under the provisions of the Revenue Book Circular. 6. Accordingly, the concerned Collector, Bilaspur is directed to consider and decide the representation dated 20.04.2026 (Annexure P/4) submitted by the petitioner, strictly in accordance with law, after affording due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and after taking into consideration the documents and material placed by the petitioner in support of his claim. 7. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner. The competent authority shall consider the representation independently and decide the same strictly in accordance with law. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the present writ petition stands disposed of. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha