Dismissed¶22

Triveni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC6 Jan 2026WPC/24/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

locus standi; government land; eviction proceedings; Tahsildar inaction; Sub-Divisional Officer order; inter se dispute; writ petition dismissed as not maintainable; Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC No. 24 of 2026; Narendra Kumar Vyas; 07/01/2026

What did the court decide?

Since there is an inter se dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 8 and the disputed land is government land, it is for the government to take action against any individual, and the petitioner has no locus standi to file the petition. ¶21

Triveni Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

2026:CGHC:812

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 24 of 2026

¶5

1 - Triveni Bai W/o Sukh Das, Aged About 60 Years R/o House No. 100, Amti, Anda, District Durg C.G.

¶6

... Petitioner(s)

¶7

versus

¶8

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G.

¶9

2 - The Collector Durg, District Durg C.G.

¶10

3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (R) Durg, District Durg C.G.

¶11

4 - Station House Officer, P.S. Anda, District Durg C.G.

¶12

5 - Tehsildar, Anda, District Durg C.G.

¶13

6 - Revenue Inspector, Anda, Tehsil And District Durg C.G.

¶14

7 - Patwari, Halka No. 30, Anda, Tehsil And District Durg C.G.

¶15

8 - Rajkumar Sahu S/o Bisahu Ram Sahu, R/o Village Amti, Tehsil And District Durg C.G.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Purnendra Khichariya, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board

¶18

07/01/2026

¶19

The petitioner is aggrieved with the inaction on the part of Tahsildar, Durg as despite order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, no proceeding has been initiated for evicting respondent No. 8.

¶20

Learned State counsel would submit that the disputed land is a government land, therefore, the petitioner has no right to claim on the disputed land and also to evict respondent No. 8 from the disputed land and would pray for dismissal of the writ petition.

¶21

From perusal of record, it is quite vivid that there is inter se dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 8. Even otherwise, the disputed land is a government land, therefore, it is for the government to take action against any individual and the petitioner has no locus standi to file this petition.

¶22

Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶23

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶24

Arun

¶25

Digitally signed by ARUN ARUN KUMAR KUMAR DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.08 11:38:43 +0530

Triveni Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Triveni Bai 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

Ambalal Jhara Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Anil Dodwani Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Prasanna Kumar Ekka Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Loknath Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sanjay Sundarani Vs Municipal Corporation Raipur

Chhotelal Prajapati Vs State of Chhattisgarh