1 2026:CGHC:18283 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1784 of 2026 1 - Parshuram S/o Motilal Aged About 55 Years Caste - Satnami, R/o Village - Samaniya, Ratanpur, Tahsil - Kapoo, District - Raigarh Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 2 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - The Tahsildar Sargaon, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 4 - The Station House Officer Police Station, Kapoo, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 5 - Halka Patwari P H No. 12, Village Ratanpur, Tahsil Kapoo, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Maghelal Baiga S/o Subran Baiga R/o Village Ratanpur, Tahsil - Kapoo, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Amit Nayak, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 22/04/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set- aside/quash the impugned order dated 30.09.2025 and impugned memo dated 12.11.2025 (Annexure P/1 & P/2) and further be pleased to direct the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the instant writ petition is being preferred against the impugned dispossession order dated 30.09.2025 passed in Revenue Case No. 202506042400073/A-70/2024-25, whereby respondent No. 4 has directed the petitioner to vacate and remove his possession from the land bearing Khasra No. 741/1 situated at Village Ratanpur, District Raigarh (C.G.), failing which the matter would be referred to respondent No. 3 for issuance of a warrant against the 3 petitioner for his detention in civil jail; that the present petition also challenges the impugned memo dated 12.11.2025, whereby respondent No. 4 has directed respondent No. 5 to dispossess the petitioner from the aforesaid land and submit a compliance report; that it is submitted the petitioner is in long-standing possession of his own land bearing Khasra No. 730/2, admeasuring 0.279 hectare, situated at Village Ratanpur, where he has constructed his residential house, courtyard, and cultivated field, and the said property constitutes the sole source of shelter and livelihood for the petitioner and his family members; and that in the event of dispossession from the said land, the petitioner and his family would be rendered homeless and left without any means of shelter, particularly during the harsh winter season, as the petitioner has no alternative accommodation. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been residing on the land in question for the last 8 to 10 years and has constructed a residential house thereon, wherein he is presently living; however, it is contended that, on the basis of a complaint allegedly made by respondent No. 6, eviction proceedings were initiated against the petitioner by the Tahsildar, Kapu, vide order dated 30.09.2025, without due consideration of the petitioner’s long-standing possession and residential use of the said land. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the same. 4 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further taking into account the submission of the petitioner that he has already filed an application for settlement of the land in question before the competent authorities, it is directed that the Tahsildar, Kapu shall duly consider the case of the petitioner, afford him a reasonable opportunity of hearing, examine all relevant documents and material placed on record, and thereafter pass a reasoned and appropriate order strictly in accordance with law. 7. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat