Swapan Kumar Saha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Respondent No.1 thereby directing them to issue No

¶23

2

¶24

Objection Certificate to the petitioner to carry out mutation proceedings with respect to the above mentioned Khasra numbers/land belonging to the petitioner; and further vacate the stay on carrying out mutation proceedings with respect to the above mentioned Khasra numbers/land belonging to the petitioner.

¶25

10.3 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Respondent Authorities thereby directing them to dismiss the attachment proceedings initiated against above mentioned Khasra numbers/land belonging to the petitioner.

¶26

10.4 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Respondent Authorities thereby directing them to mutate the above mentioned Khasra numbers/land belonging to the petitioner as per procedure prescribed under the law.

¶27

10.5 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to the Respondent No.1 thereby directing them to consider / decide the pending representations dated 01.08.2024 & 27.08.2024 at the earliest.

¶28

(vi) That any other order/relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioner in the ends of justice along with the cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioner.”

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that petitioner has purchased land bearing Khasra No.500/11 & part of 500/5, area 0.539 & 0.270 hectare respectively, total area 0.809 hectare vide registered

¶30

3

¶31

sale deed dated 29.12.2015 and Khasra No.498/3, 498/4, 499/1, 499/2, 498/2/क shared Khasra No.500/7/1, 500/5, 500/70, 500/71, 500/83 & 500/84, total area 5.578 hectare vide registered sale deed dated 27.1.2016 situated at Village Tarpongi, Tehsil Tilda, District Raipur (CG) from B. N. Gold Real Estate and Allied Pvt. Ltd. Company. He would further submit that some of the aforesaid land has been mutated in the name of petitioner in revenue record and some has not been mutated because various immovable properties of aforesaid company have been attached by the Collector of Raipur District & Mahasamund District under the Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005 (henceforth referred as ‘Act, 2005’), which has also been made absolute by the concerned Special Judges under the Act, 2005. He further submitted that Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Raipur under the Act, 2005 has specifically observed in para 8 of its order dated 22.10.2021 passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.38/2016 that, the said land purchased by petitioner, who was objector in above case, have not been attached, as the petitioner had already purchased those lands prior to attachment, therefore, he is free to do all legal act in respect of land purchased by him. It is further submitted that, earlier vide ex-parte order passed by learned Special Judge, Mahasamund under the Act, 2005 vide order dated 06.8.2021, had attached said disputed property, but the same has been recalled vide order dated 26.7.2024 passed by learned Principal District Judge, Mahasamund (she ought to have been mentioned her nomenclature as ‘Special Judge’ in order impugned, under the Act, 2005) in Misc. Civil Suit No.08/2023. Thus, as per aforesaid two orders, the disputed land purchased by petitioner have not been attached, as he had already purchased it vide registered sale

¶32

4

¶33

deed prior to order of attachment passed by concerned District Magistrate, despite that, respondent authorities are not mutating some of the land purchased by petitioner in his name and further remark has been made in revenue record in respect of those land, which have been mutated, is not being deleted. He further submitted that 1^st representation (Annexure-P/1 Colly) dated 31.7.2024 and 2^nd representation dated 27.8.2024 have been filed before the Nodal officer/Additional Collector, Raipur (CG), but the same have not decided yet, therefore, he submitted that, petitioner is ready to file fresh representation for redressal of his grievance before the respondent No.1/Collector, Raipur and this petition may be disposed of directing to decide the same, within a period specified by this Court.

¶34

Hence, he prays that this petition may be disposed of directing respondent No.1 to decide the fresh representation filed by petitioner.

¶35

Per contra, learned State counsel would submit that, if petitioner filed fresh representation, then it shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶36

Grievance of the petitioner is that, he has purchased aforesaid land vide registered sale deed prior to attachment of the property of B. N. Gold Real Estate and Allied Pvt. Ltd. Company. This fact is also reflected from para 8 of the order dated 22.10.2021 passed by Sessions Judge / Special Judge (under the Act, 2005) in Misc. Criminal Case No.38/2016 and order dated 26.7.2024 passed by Principal Judge, Mahasamund in Misc. Civil Suit No.08/2023. Learned Sessions Judge / Special Judge, Raipur has specifically observed in para 8 that, land of objector (petitioner herein) has not been attached by competent authority, as he has already purchased aforesaid land prior to

¶37

5

¶38

attachment, therefore, he is free to do the act in accordance with law in respect of those land.

¶39

Having considered the grievance of the petitioner and prayer made by his counsel, this petition is disposed of granting liberty to the petitioner to file fresh representation before the respondent No.1 within a period of 15 days from today and the same shall be considered and decided by it, within a further period 45 days, strictly in accordance with law.

¶40

With aforesaid observations and directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of .

¶41

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE

¶44

Rukhsar

Swapan Kumar Saha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Swapan Kumar Saha v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Navjeet Singh Tuteja Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Laxmi Narayana Hospital Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Sumitra Sinha Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Panmeshwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Lakshman Bhaniya Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Village Panchayat, Kalyanpur Vs State of Chhattisgarh