1 2026:CGHC:15558 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1491 of 2026 Basant Kumar Agrawal S/o Shri Lakhiprasad Agrawal Aged About 38 Years R/o Beneath To New Talab, Gudhiyari, Raipur, Tehsil And District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Raipur Division, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Tehsildar Dharsiwa Tehsil- Dharsiwa, District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Parmanand Sahu S/o Shri Murali Lal Sahu Aged About 44 Years R/o Near Panchayat Bhawan, Gotiyapara, Urkura, Tehsil- Dharsiwa, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents {Cause title, as taken from CIS} For Petitioner : Mr. Surfaraj Khan, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 to 5 : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer. {Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi} Order on Board 06/04/2026 1. Instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioner seeking following reliefs :- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a Suitable Writ (s), Order (s), Direction (S0, by directing the Tehsildar Dharsiwa to first decide the objection filed by the petitioner under Section 322 of the Land Revenue Code (Annexure P/3) before proceeding ahead in the Revenue Case No. 202603111700027/2026 2 at the earliest (within a time frame), in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleaded to call the entire records from the court below for its kind perusal. 10.3 Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that show cause notice dated 13.03.2026 has been issued to the petitioner by respondent No. 5 – Tahsildar, Dharsiwa, District Raipur (C.G.) in Revenue Case No. 202603111700027/2026 whereby a proceeding is drawn against the petitioner under Section 248 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (henceforth, “Code, 1959”) in respect of encroachment of Government land situated at Village – Giroud, Tehsil Dharsiwa, District Raipur (C.G.) bearing Khasra No. 511/5, area 6.390 hectare and Khasra No. 630, area 0.462 hectare. The petitioner has submitted reply to the said show cause notice and also also filed an application under Section 32 of the Code, 1959 raising objection about the maintainability of revenue proceedings drawn against the petitioner. It is next submitted that the respondents have already dismantle the subject road allegedly constructed by alleged encroacher. As such, it is prays that respondent No. 5 be directed to first decide the application under Section 32 of the Code, 1959, thereafter proceed with the aforesaid revenue case. 3. In reply, learned counsel for the State / respondents No. 1 to 5 would submit that the petitioner has filed the order sheets of the aforesaid revenue case, which show that the petitioner filed an application under Section 32 of the Code, 1959 on 20.03.2026. Subsequently, the case was fixed by Tehsildar, Dharsiwa for order on 24.03.2026, but the petitioner has not filed a copy of the order sheets after 20.03.2026. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 5. As has been contended by counsel for petitioner, proceedings under Section 248 of the Code, 1959, have been initiated by the Tehsildar, Dharsiwa; and in pursuance thereof, a notice has been issued to Poonam Chaudhary and petitioner —Basant Kumar Agarwal stating therein that they have encroached upon grazing land / Nistari land. The issue will be considered and decided by the Tehsildar, Dharsiwa as to whether the petitioner and Poonam Chaudhary have encroached upon the government land or not. There appears to be no issue regarding the maintainability of the matter; however, if the petitioner has filed any such application before the Tehsildar, Dharsiwa, he may submit a request to the concerned Tehsildar that the said application filed under Section 32 of the Code, 1959 be decided first and if Tahsildar declined to accept such application, then the petitioner may raise his grievance before the SDO (Revenue) or concerned Collector, who are the supervisory authority of the Tahsildar. 6. In view of above, this Court is not inclined to entertain instant writ petition invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, this petition is dismissed at the motion stage itself. 7. Pending interlocutory application (s), if any, stand disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.04.10 14:41:16 +0530 4