Dismissed¶28

Abhay Barua v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC28 Jan 2024WPC/392/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court, WPC No. 392 of 2024 (29.01.2024, Rakesh Mohan Pandey, J.), dismissed: prayer for mandamus to Tehsildar, Bilaspur for early/time-bound disposal of pending Section 250 C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 application (Matter no. 202303074200003/A-70/22-23, filed 03.10.2022) regarding ownership/demarcation of land refused; principles of chronological/seniority-based disposal and no queue-jumping; no urgency shown; no costs. Counsel: Vedant Shadangi for petitioner; Dilman Rati Minj, G.A. for State.

What did the court decide?

Ordinarily, disposal of cases in courts must follow seniority, i.e., a chronological basis, and deviation from that must be an exception on valid and genuine grounds; no litigant should normally be allowed to jump the queue or steal a march over litigants who filed earlier. ¶26

Abhay Barua Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 392 of 2024

¶5

Abhay Barua S/o Suresh Barua, Aged About 31 Years R/o Near Post Office, Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2. Commissioner, Bilaspur Division District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶9

3. Collector, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

4. Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶11

5. Tahsildar Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh.

¶12

---- Respondents

¶13

(Cause Title is taken from Case Information System)

¶14

For Petitioner For State

¶15

: Mr. Vedant Shadangi, Advocate : Mr. Dilman Rati Minj, G.A

¶16

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey

¶17

Order on Board

¶18

2 9.01.2024

¶19

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

¶20

(i) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Learned Court of Tehsildar, Bilaspur (C.G.) to decide the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 250 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959, in Matter no. 202303074200003/ A-70 / 22-23 within stipulated period of time, preferably within a period of four weeks.

¶21

(ii) The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.

¶22

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that some dispute was raised with respect to the subject land regarding its ownership/demarcation by some nearby residents of the subject land; therefore, the petitioner was denied entry into the subject land. He would further submit that for those reasons petitioner moved an application before the learned Tehsildar, Bilaspur (C.G.) under Section 250 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959.

¶23

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would oppose and submit that a representation was made to the learned Tehsildar, Bilaspur and the same is pending

¶24

¶25

consideration. He would also submit that there is no urgency in deciding the representation and as and when the occasion comes to decide the representation, the same will be decided strictly in accordance with the law.

¶26

4. Ordinarily, the disposal of a case in Courts must be as per the seniority, namely chronological basis, and deviation from that must be an exception on valid and genuine grounds. No litigant should normally be allowed to jump the queue or steal a march over the other litigants who filed cases earlier. This works out injustice to those who cannot approach this Court for such reliefs and to all litigants waiting in the queue. Also, the Presiding officers are compelled to give a time frame for disposal, disregarding the pendency of much older cases.

¶27

5. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner filed this petition seeking direction to the Tehsildar, Bilaspur for early disposal of an application moved under Section 250 of C.G. Land Revenue Code whereas the aforesaid application was moved on 03.10.2022, as there is no urgency in deciding the application, I am not inclined to grant the relief sought by the petitioner.

¶28

6. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).

¶29

Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

¶30

siddhant

Abhay Barua v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhay Barua v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Avinash Tripathi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ku. Sanjita Barman Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Asmita Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Legend Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dipak Mandal Vs Municipal Corporation of Raipur

Loknath Nayak Vs the State of Chhattisgarh