1 2026:CGHC:8189 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 657 of 2026 1 - Tumanlal Yadav S/o Mehattar Lal Yadav Aged About 56 Years Caste Raut, R/o Village Bhirai, Tahsil Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Revenue, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector, Balod District- Balod (C.G.) 3 - Tahsildar Gurur Balod District- Balod (C.G.) 4 - Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bhirai, Tahsil Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) 5 - Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bhirai, Tahsil Gurur District- Balod (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Adv. For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Adv. General. Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board 13-2-2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- “10.1) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.02.13 17:29:35 +0530 2 from the possession of the respondents for its kind perusal. 10.2) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash/set-aside the notice dated 06.02.2026 issued by the respondent no. 4 and 5. 10.3 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also be kindly granted.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, the petitioner is in possession of land bearing Khasra No. 343, area 672 Sq. Ft. situated at Gram Panchayat Bhirai, Janpad Panchayat Gurur, Distt. Balod since the time of his father i.e. since last 50 years, but without providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, eviction order (Annexure P-1) dated 6-2-2026 has been issued by the Sarpanch and Secretary, Grampanchayat, Bhirai, Janpad Panchayat Gurur, District Balod. Hence, it is prayed that, interim protection may be granted to the petitioner and this petition may be admitted for hearing. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents/State would submit that the notice (Annexure P-1) itself shows that the eviction order has been passed by the Tehsildar Gurur, District Balod in revenue Case No. 202307240300001/ A-68/ 2022-23 after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. He would further submit that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order of eviction, then he could challenge it by filing appeal under Section 44 of the CG Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue). He would further submit that, since eviction order has been passed after providing due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and 3 since there is an alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable. 4. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, even if the eviction order has been passed by the Tehsildar, then also, the Sarpanch and Secretary of Gram Panchayat have no right to issue eviction notice. However, he submits that, the petitioner intends to file appeal against the order passed by the Tehsildar, but till filing the appeal, interim protection may be granted in favour of the petitioner as in eviction notice (Annexure P-1) dated 6-2-2026, date of removal of alleged encroachment of petitioner is fixed as 13-2-2026 i.e. today itself. 5. Having considered the aforesaid facts and further considering the fact that, the eviction order has been passed by the Tehsildar, Gurur, Distt. Balod in Revenue Case No. 202307240300001 A-68 year 2022-23 against which alternative efficacious remedy available to the petitioner is to file appeal under Section 44 of the CG Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), hence I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition by invoking extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, since the petitioner has been directed to remove the alleged encroachment by today itself i.e. 13-2-2026, therefore, the respondents No. 4 and 5 are directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioner for 15 days from today. In between, the petitioner may file appeal against the order passed by the Tehsildar, Gurur. However, it is made clear that, if appeal is not filed within 15 days from today, then the interim protection granted in favour of the petitioner shall loose its efficacy. 6. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed off. 4 7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed off. 8. Certified copy today. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge pathak