Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 37621 (CHH)

Rakesh Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

WPC/2644/2016 · 2026-09-29

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010247592016 2026:CGHC:42559 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2644 of 2016 * - Rakesh Kumar S/o Shri Kishorilal, Aged About 45 Years R/o M.I.G. 5/2, Mansarowar, Bhilai, 3, Tahsil Bhilai, Distirct Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, (Land Record) Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Tahsildar, Bhilai 3, Tahsil Patan, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Revenue Inspector, Bhilai 3, Tahsil Patan, Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : None For Respondents : Ms. Monika Thakur, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30/09/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs:- 10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, particularly the respondent No. 2 and 3 to demarcate the land of the petitioner bearing Khasra no. 369/188, area 0.10 acre land, P.H. No. 01, Bhilai- 3, Tahsil- Patan, District- Durg through registered sale deed dated on 09.04.1996. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, particularly the respondent no. 2 Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.10.01 11:06:31 +0530 2 and 3 to decide the applications/representations of the petitioner by speaking order. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief, as it may deem fit. 10.4 Cost of the petition may also be awarded. 2. Ms. Monika Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State/respondents would submit that demarcation was conducted by Tahsildar on 30.07.2017 and thus, this petition has become infructuous. 3. Having considered the fact that demarcation was conducted by the concerned Tahsildar way back in the year 2017, therefore, nothing survive for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti