1 CGHC010168602021 2026:CGHC:42546 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2856 of 2021 1 - Ramkhelawan Kewat S/o Late Munshiram Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Budhikhar, Tehsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Budiaen Bai Kewat W/o Ramkhelawan Kewat Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Budhikhar, Tehsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Police Station Rakhi, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Masturi, Tehsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Tehsildar Masturi, Office Of The Tehsildar, Tehsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 5 - Sarpanch Of The Gram Panchayat Budhikhar, Tehsil Masturi District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Rupesh Shrivastava and Mr. Chandradeep Prasad, Advocates For State : Mr. Vivek Verma, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 30/09/2026 PRIYANKA VERMA Digitally signed by PRIYANKA VERMA Date: 2026.10.03 11:14:34 +0530 2 1. The petitioners, in this Writ Petition, have prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioners. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quashed the order/memo 10.06.2021 passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Masturi (Annexure P/1.) 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to pay the compensation of Rs. 100000.00 (One Lakh) towards demolistion of their boundary. 10.4 Any other relief or relief(s), which this Hon'ble Curt deems fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted 10.5 Cost of the petition may also be awarded.” 2. Facts of the case in brief are that the petitioners, being landless farmers, were allotted 5.00 acres of Government land in the year 1980-81 and have been in possession thereof since then. They constructed a house and boundary wall and have been cultivating the remaining land. Subsequently, treating the petitioners as encroachers in view of the Government policy for establishment of a Gothan, the respondent authorities passed the impugned order for their eviction and pursuant thereto, demolished their boundary wall without affording them an opportunity of hearing. Hence, the present petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that without there being any resolution or proper consideration, the concerned Gram Panchayat has 3 treated the petitioners as encroachers, pursuant to which the concerned SDO has issued a notice for their eviction from the land in question. They submit that according to the petitioners, they are patta holders in respect of Khasra No. 725/1. They further submit that since the petitioners have not been afforded any opportunity of hearing, the concerned authorities cannot pass any order of eviction and are required to first hear the petitioners, consider their documents and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioners have not been granted any patta conferring any right of possession or construction over the land in question and that by resolution, the land was allotted only for plantation purposes and the petitioners would have no right except to undertake plantation thereon. He submits that the petitioners have intermingled various facts and documents in the present petition, which has created confusion. He submits that, in particular, the petitioners claim that the alleged patta was granted in respect of land bearing Khasra No.725/1, whereas the patta lease document states otherwise and therefore, the petitioners are required to clarify the same. He further submits that the land in question was granted only for plantation purposes and did not confer any possessory right upon the petitioners and therefore, the order has rightly been passed against the petitioners. 5. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, particularly the arguments advanced by both sides, it would be appropriate to direct the respondent authorities to afford an opportunity to the petitioners to file the 4 documents in support of their entitlement and thereafter hear them and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. 6. Since this Court, vide order dated 07.09.2021, had directed the respondents authorities not to forcibly dispossess the petitioners and the matter has remained pending since then, it would be appropriate to direct the respondents authorities to consider the claim of the petitioners and decide the same in accordance with law, after affording them due opportunity of hearing, within a period of 60 days. It is made clear that the petitioners are under obligations to file all relevant documents before the concerned authorities within a period of 15 days and in turn, the concerned authorities may also call for any other documents, if required, and thereafter pass an appropriate order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the documents filed by the petitioners. In the meantime, till expiry of the said period of 60 days, the order dated 07.09.2021 shall remain in force and the petitioners shall not be evicted from the land in question. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Priyanka