WPC/4700/2026 of Salik Singh Thakur, Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 15 September 2026

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue Administration And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, C.G.

2. Additional Collector- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, C.G.

3. Tehsildar, Suhela, District- Balodabazar-Bhatapara, C.G.

4. Niranjan Verma, S/o Khamhan Verma, R/o Village-Suhela, Post Office And P.S.- Suhela, Tehsil- Suhela, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, C.G.

5. Thanwar Verma, S/o Bhokalu Verma R/o Village-Suhela, Post Office And PS- Suhela, Tehsil- Suhela, District- Balodabazar- Bhatapara, C.G.

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For State : Mr. Hariom Rai, PL Hon'ble Shri Justice

Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board 16/09/2026

1. Heard on I.A. No.01/2026, an application for exemption.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already filed the relevant documents, therefore, he does not want to press I.A. No.01/2026.

3. In view of the above, I.A. No.01/2026 is dismissed as not pressed.

4. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

5. The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 19/6/26 and remand the matter back to the Tehsildar, Suhela for fresh adjudication in accordance with law in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the instant case, for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to grant the cost of the petition to the petitioner. 10.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.”

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is illegal and without jurisdiction, as the circular dated 16.11.2017, relating to disputed revenue entries, is not applicable to the present case, which concerns encroachment over the petitioner’s land bearing Khasra No.

763. He further submits that the Tehsildar failed to exercise jurisdiction under Section 248 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code.

7. The aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is not opposed by learned counsel for the State.

8. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the order dated 19.06.2026 has been passed in appellate jurisdiction and not in revisional jurisdiction. Therefore, the petitioner has an alternative remedy of approaching the concerned revisional authority, i.e., the concerned Commissioner. However, the petitioner has directly approached this Court. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Commissioner by filing a revision under Section 50 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code. The concerned Commissioner shall treat the order dated 19.06.2026 passed by the Additional Collector, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara (C.G.), as an appellate order and shall entertain and decide the revision in accordance with law.

9. The petitioner is directed to approach the concerned authority within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The concerned authority shall consider and decide the revision filed by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law and on its own merits.

10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

Judge

Priyanka