Disposed

Laxmi Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC28 Nov 2023WPC/4951/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of a writ petition seeking a direction to decide a pending revenue application. The Court held that the petitioner failed to demonstrate prior application to the Collector seeking direction, thus refusing to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226, though liberty was granted to approach the Collector.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to raise grievance before the concerned Collector; writ petition disposed of.

Laxmi Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Public Procurement and Tenders | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 4951 of 2023

¶5

Laxmi Chandra S/o Kanhaiyalal Lodhi Aged About 55 Years R/o Village Khilora, Tahsil Dhamdha, District Durg (C.G.)

¶6

---- Petitioner Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Durg (C.G.)

¶8

Tahsildar Tahsil-Bori, District Durg (C.G.)

¶9

---- Respondents

¶10

For petitioner Mr. Jitendra Gupta, Adv. For Respondent/State Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, Panel Lawyer on advance copy.

¶11

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board

¶12

28-11-2023

¶13

With consent of the learned counsel for the parties, heard the matter finally.

¶14

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

¶15

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue appropriate writ/direction/order as to direct the respondent authorities to decide the proceeding bearing Revenue Case No. 202201102700032A5 2021-22 pending before respondent No. 2 expeditiously within a stipulated time frame, in the interest of justice.

¶16

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may pass any order in the interest of justice in favour of the petitioner with cost

¶17

¶18

of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that his land bearing Khasra No. 159, 161, 48/4, 162/3, 163/2,190/2, 190/3, 45/3, 47/4, 166/7, total area 4.61 Hectare situated at P.H. No. 24, RI Circle & Tahsil Bori, District Durg was subject matter of Bandobast and after Bandobast, new Khasra No. 288, 289, 291, 308, 303, 306, 455, 456, 365 were allotted, but after aforesaid Bandobast, total area of his land, which was 4.61 hectare, was reduced to 2.75 acres. In this regard, the petitioner has filed application before the Tahsildar, Tahsil Bori, Distt. Durg, which has been registered as Revenue case No. 202201102700032A5 202122 on 3-9-2021, but till date, aforesaid case has not been decided by the Tahsildar, Tahsil Bori, therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the relief sought for in this petition may be granted to him.

¶20

Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that the petitioner has filed certified copy of proceedings, which shows that the respondents have marked their presence in that revenue proceeding and after filing their reply, proceeding is going on.

¶21

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶22

Grievance of the petitioner in the instant petition is that his

¶23

¶24

application has not been decided, which was filed on 3-1-2022, therefore, he has filed instant petition, but the petitioner has not filed any document to demonstrate that he has filed any application before the concerned Collector seeking direction to the concerned Tahsildar to decide the issue, instead thereof, instant petition has been filed, therefore, I am not inclined to entertain instant writ petition by exercising the extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, liberty is left with the petitioner to raise his grievance before the concerned Collector, who, this Court expects, shall pass appropriate order, if such remedy is availed by the petitioner.

¶25

With the aforesaid direction, this petition is disposed of at motion stage itself.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶28

pathak

Laxmi Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxmi Chandra v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Meera Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bheem Kumar Mehto Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Latif Ahmed Siddiqui Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Yadav @ Halka Yadav Vs Shri Sanjeev Kumar Jha

Lakshni Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Raj Kumari Vs State of Chhattisgarh