Taukir Ahmad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, Dist. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Korba, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Podi-Uproda, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar Tahsil - Podi-Uproda, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 5 - Superintendent Of Police Korba, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 6 - Station House Officer Police Station Katghora, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 7 - Chandra Kumar S/o Samar Singh Aged About 50 Years Caste - Musalman, R/o. Village - Tanakhar, Tahsil - Podi-Uproda, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 8- Ramkumar S/o Samar Singh Aged About 45 Years Caste - Musalman, R/o. Village - Tanakhar, Tahsil - Podi-Uproda, Dist. Korba (C.G.) 9 - Smt. Sumitra Bai Yadav D/o Late Kartikram Aged About 53 Years W/o. Ramayan Yadav, Caste - Musalman, R/o. Village - Tanakhar, Tahsil - Podi-Uproda, Dist. Korba (C.G.)

¶10

... Respondent(s)

¶11

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C.R. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Satish Gutpa, G.A.

¶12

2

¶13

Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge

¶14

Order on Board

¶15

10/07/2025

¶16

By way of this revision petition, the petitioner has prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this review petition and to recall order dated 12.06.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 2787 of 2025 and to issue direction to the respondent authorities to give protection to the petitioner for construction of boundary wall and peacefully cultivating paddy and vegetable in every time for survival.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner filed a writ petition bearing WPC No. 2787 fo 2025 before this Hon’ble Court. The matter came up for hearing before this Hon’ble Court on 12.06.2025 and during hearing the case, the petitioner could not argue the matter properly and this Hon’ble Court has dismissed the petition vide its order dated 12.06.2025 which is dissatisfactory and hence the petitioner only prayed for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities to give protection to the petitioner for construction of boundary wall and peacefully cultivating paddy and vegetable in every time for survival.

¶18

Learned State Counsel submits that the petitioner has alternate remedy available to redress his grievance. There is no need of interference from this Hon’ble Court, therefore, the present petition deserves to be dismissed.

¶19

I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties at length and

¶20

3

¶21

perused the record with utmost circumspection.

¶22

Perusal of record shows that the petitioner has filed a writ petition bearing WPC No. 2787 of 2025 before this Court which was dismissed by this Court vide its order dated 12.06.2025. The petitioner has again filed the instant petition praying for issuance of direction to the respondents to give protection to the petitioner for construction of boundary wall and peacefully cultivating paddy and vegetable.

¶23

In view of the submission made by the learned State Counsel, the petition is dismissed as the petitioner having alternate remedy available for redressal of his grievances.

Sd/-

(Arvind Kumar Verma)

JUDGE

Madhurima

Taukir Ahmad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Taukir Ahmad v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Diljeet Kaur Chhabra Vs Sanjay Narang

Smt. Chandarmati Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Rashmi Agrawal Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gurbari, Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Kanti Prasad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Tikaram Gupta Vs State of Chhattisgarh