Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/4994/2026 of ROSHAN ARA Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 29 September 2026
2026:CGHC:42494 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4994 of 2026 1 - Roshan Ara W/o Sirtaj Ansari Aged About 48 Years R/o Bairagpara (T V Tower) Tehsil Pandariya Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department
CGHC010381072026
2026:CGHC:42494
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 4994 of 2026
1 - Roshan Ara W/o Sirtaj Ansari Aged About 48 Years R/o Bairagpara (T V Tower) Tehsil Pandariya Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Distt- Raipur
(C.G.)
-
Collector,
Distt-
Kabirdham
(C.G.)
Sub Divisional Officer, (R) Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.)
Tehsildar, Tehsil Pandariya Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.)
5 - Superintendent Of Police, Kabirdham, Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.)
6 - Station House Officer (S H O), Police Station Pandariya Distt- Kabirdham
(C.G.)
7 - Sanskar Jain S/o Santosh Jain R/o Gram Roaha Ward No. 08
Tehsildar Pandariya Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.)
... Respondent(s)
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
Digitally
signed by
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Abhyuday Tripathi, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)/State :
Mr. Praveen Das, Addl. A.G.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 30/09/2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
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 issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing Respondent Authorities to forthwith stop, halt, and restrain all ongoing unauthorized construction carried out by Private respondent over the subject Kotwari Service Land. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing Respondent Authorities (Tehsildar, Pandariya) and (Station House Officer, P.S. Pandatarai) to immediately execute and strictly enforce on the spot the subsisting interim stay order dated 08.04.2026 (ANNEXURE P/10) as well as the written administrative direction dated 10.09.2026 (ANNEXURE P/13). 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing Respondent Authorities to initiate action against the illegal transfer and non-agricultural diversion of Kotwari Service Land under Section 183 of the M.P./C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 & declare the unauthorized sale/transfer in favor of Private Respondent as void ab initio, and order the re-mutation of the land in the name of the State Government. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Respondent Authorities to remove the unauthorized structure and restore the petitioner's free, unobstructed right of way and access to the main road. 10.5 Pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Kotwari Land has been purchased by respondent No. 7, which is not permissible under law. The Kotwari Land is service land and cannot be alienated. Upon expiry of the service, the said land is supposed to be returned to the State, and no person can alienate the same. If any purchaser has purchased such land, the transaction is illegal and void ab initio. As such, the petitioner has made a complaint; however, the authorities have not yet considered his complaint, and therefore, he has filed this petition.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that an enquiry is being conducted by the concerned Collector and that the authorities are taking all necessary steps to determine whether the Kotwari Land has been purchased by respondent No. 7. If it is found that the Kotwari Land has been sold and purchased by respondent No. 7, then, in light of the order passed by the Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Gajendra Das vs. State of Chhattisgarh, passed in WPC No. 1571/2020 on 23rd July, 2026, the said land, being non-transferable, cannot be transferred, and appropriate action shall be taken for restoration of the land in the name of the State in accordance with law.
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner is satisfied with the reply submitted by learned State counsel and submits that if an enquiry is being conducted, the purpose of filing this petition would be served. However, he submits that the concerned authorities may be directed to conclude the same within a stipulated period.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and further considering the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Gajendra Das vs. State of Chhattisgarh, passed in WPC No. 1571/2020 on 23rd July, 2026, wherein the Full Bench of this Court has already settled the issue and held that Kotwari Land cannot be alienated and no title can be acquired on the basis of such land, the concerned authorities are expected to enquire into the matter and pass appropriate orders, while ensuring that the said land is retained by the State if the Kotwari Land has been sold to respondent No. 7.
7. The aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With this observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat