Bigen Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

10.3.That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Restrain the private respondents from making any construction or interference over the said land.

¶23

10.4.That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner until final disposal of the matter. 10.5.That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case. ”

¶24

Facts of the case :- The present petition has been preferred challenging the arbitrary and illegal action of the respondent authorities in permitting interference and construction over land traditionally used by the petitioner-villagers as shamshan (cremation) land, where last rites have been performed for generations. It is averred that on 22.01.2026, bulldozer action was undertaken without any prior notice, whereas notice was issued only on 23.01.2026, rendering the action ex facie arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice. Thereafter, the private respondents commenced construction over the disputed land. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner submitted a representation before the Collector seeking an inquiry, restraint on the construction activities, and protection of the shamshan land; however, no effective action has been taken thereon, necessitating the filing of the present petition.

¶25

3

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a demolition notice dated 23.01.2026 was issued by the respondent authorities, pursuant to which the petitioner submitted a detailed reply on 01.02.2026 raising all relevant facts and objections. However, without duly considering or deciding the said reply, the respondent authorities proceeded with the demolition proceedings in a wholly arbitrary manner and in violation of the principles of natural justice. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner continues to remain in possession of the property in question and, apprehending coercive action at the hands of the respondent authorities, has approached this Court seeking appropriate protection in accordance with law.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the demolition action has already been carried out by the competent authorities. It is further submitted that, according to the petitioner's own case, certain private persons are presently undertaking construction activities over the land in question; however, such persons, being necessary and proper parties to the present proceedings, have not been impleaded as party respondents. In the absence of the said persons, any adjudication on the issues raised in the petition would be incomplete. It is, therefore, contended that the petitioner has approached this Court without impleading the necessary parties who are likely to be affected by any order that may be passed in the present proceedings.

¶28

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the

¶29

4

¶30

documents available on record with utmost circumspection and particularly, the orders impugned herein.

¶31

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy, deems it appropriate to direct the Tehsildar, Lakhanpur to consider and decide the reply submitted by the petitioner, along with all relevant facts and materials available on record. The Tehsildar shall afford due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as all necessary and affected parties and thereafter pass a reasoned order strictly in accordance with law, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order, within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The petitioner and the concerned parties shall appear before the Tehsildar, Lakhanpur as and when required for the said proceedings.

¶32

Till the aforesaid exercise is completed and the order is passed by the Tehsildar, Lakhanpur, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner.

¶33

With these observations and directions this petition is disposed of.

¶34

Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶35

Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶36

Saxena

Bigen Das v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bigen Das 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhavesh Pandey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ashok Kumar Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Mala Chatterjee Vs the State of Chhattisgarh

Samarin Bai Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramprasad Rahi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kailash Kumar Sahu Vs Smt. Dolly Sahu