Disposed

Balmukund Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC3 Mar 2024WPC/1263/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition filed under Article 226 sought directions to decide a pending application for encroachment settlement and restrain demolition works. The Court disposed of the petition by directing the Collector to decide the application within 30 days while maintaining status-quo.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Collector, Raipur to decide the pending representation within 30 days; order to maintain status-quo.

Balmukund Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 1263 of 2024

¶5

Balmukund Sharma S/o Shri Madan Lal Sharma Aged About 70 Years Resident Of Siliyari (Kurud), Tahsil Dharsiva, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Ministry Of Revenue, Secretariat, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶9

The Collector District Raipur (C.G.).

¶10

The Naib Tahsildar Sargoan, District Raipur (C.G.).

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

¶13

……………………………………………………………………………………………………. For Petitioner : Mr. B. P. Sharma Advocate alongwith Mr. M. L. Sakat, Advocate

¶14

For Respondents : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, Government Advocate

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶16

Order on Board

¶17

04.03.2024

¶18

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following relief(s):-

¶19

“A. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue calling for the records of the case pertaining the petitioner’s case from the respondent concerned if this Hon’ble Court may deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶20

B. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue directing the respondent authorities to consider the claim/application dated 24.01.2024 (Annexure P-2) of the petitioner under the scheme dated 24.02.2022 (AnnexureP-1) and on following conditions and paying the amount as may be fixed by authorities, confer bhumiswami/leasehold right on the petitioner in respect of the land in possession of the petitioner, within the time frame fixed by this Hon’ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case..

¶21

C. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue restraining the State authorities from taking any action determental to the interest of the petitioner in respect of the land in question and of dispossession of the petitioner till the decision of this writ petition, in the facts and circumstances of case.

¶22

D. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts & circumstances of case.

¶23

E. Cost of the petition may also be awarded.”

¶24

¶25

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an application for settlement of encroachment was moved according to the policy of State Government dated 24.02.2022 on 24.01.2024 but till date no decision has been taken by the Collector, Raipur. He would also submit that a proceedings under Section 248 of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code has been initiated against the petitioner by the concern Tahshildar and structure has already been demolished. Therefore, it is prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned Collector to decide his representation dated 24.01.2024 and till then the respondents may be restrained from demolishing the remaining structure.

¶26

1. On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose and submit that on 24.01.2024, a representation was moved and within a period of two months, the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking direction to decide his pending representation and thus, the petition is not maintainable.

¶27

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

¶28

1. Taking into consideration the fact that a proceeding under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code is going on against the petitioner and at the same time, his application for settlement of encroachment is also pending before the Collector, Raipur, therefore, without commenting on the merit of the case, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Collector, Raipur to decide the pending representation dated 24.01.2024 of the petitioner expeditiously preferably within a period of 30 days. Meanwhile, the parties are directed to maintain status-quo .

¶29

Sd/-

¶30

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey)

¶31

Judge

¶32

amita

Balmukund Sharma v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balmukund Sharma 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

Manoj Kumar Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sonu @ Suraj Pal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sonamati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rakesh Kumar Rajak Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhagat Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxman Vs State of Chhattisgarh