Alka Lakda Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

2026:CGHC:17584

¶3

NAFR

¶4

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 3182 of 2021

¶6

Digitally VISHAKHA signed by BEOHAR VISHAKHA BEOHAR

¶7

1 - Alka Lakda D/o Shri Manohar Lakda Aged About 32 Years CasteUrav, R/o-Village-Kantajhariya, P.O. And Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Public Relation, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District-Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶11

2 - State Of Chhatisgarh, Through Its Secretary, Land Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Jan Jati Ayog, Through, Secretary, Office At-61, Jalvihar Colony, Raipur, District-Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Collector, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Superintendent Of Police, Raigarh, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 6 - Ishwar Rathiya S/o Late Shri Ghurau Rathiya Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 7 - Barat S/o Late Shri Ghurau Rathiya Aged About 22 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶12

2

¶13

8 - Ishwari D/o Late Shri Ghurau Rathiya Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 9 - Rajkumari D/o Late Shri Ghurau Rathiya Aged About 21 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 10 - Chandravati W/o Late Shri Ghurau Rathiya Aged About 45 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 11 - Shukmati D/o Tilmati Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶14

12 - Dhanmati D/o Tilmati Aged About 60 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶15

13 - Anardas Panika S/o Shri Shankardas Panika Aged About 38 Years R/o Village- Saraitola, Tehsil-Tamnar, District-Raigarh, Chhattisgarh, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents

¶16

(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)

¶17

For Petitioner :- Mr. Rajat Agrawal, Advocate For State :- Ms. Akansha Verma Dhabedkar, P.L.

¶18

SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶19

Order On Board

¶20

17.04.2026

¶21

By way of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the notices dated 03.12.2020, 06.02.2021 and 16.06.2021 issued by respondent No. 3 – Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog, on

¶22

3

¶23

the ground that the same have been issued without authority of law and jurisdiction.

¶24

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner entered into an agreement for purchase of land with late Ghurau Rathiya. Subsequently, after his death, the legal heirs, namely respondent Nos. 6 to 12, executed a registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner after receiving the entire sale consideration. The petitioner asserts that the revenue records were also duly updated. Thereafter, respondent Nos. 6 to 12 made a complaint before respondent No. 3 alleging that an amount of ₹2,50,000/had not been paid. Acting upon the said complaint, respondent No. 3 issued notices to the petitioner from time to time.

¶25

Following reliefs have been prayed by way of this petition:-

¶26

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding the respondent State to produce entire records related with the case of the petitioner for just and proper decision of the case.

¶27

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding the respondentNo.3 to quash the impugned notice dated03.12.2020, 06.02.2021 and 16.06.2021 (Annexure P/1)and proceeding initiate against

¶28

4

¶29

the petitioner, as they doesn't have a jurisdiction to adjudicate the same.

¶30

10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may be kind enough, in issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari, mandamus or any other likewise writ, directing and commanding the respondent-No. 03 to initiate proceedings against respondent no. 06 to 12, as they have frivolously filed a complaint against the petitioner, without having proper evidences or reason.

¶31

10.4 Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.”

¶32

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without there being any authority of law, repeated notices have been issued by the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog to the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner has already filed a detailed reply along with affidavit and relevant documents before the Commission. However, despite the same, the petitioner is being repeatedly directed to appear before the Commission, which is not permissible in law. It is further contended that the dispute between the parties arises out of a contractual transaction, wherein a registered sale deed has already been executed after payment of the entire consideration amount. The subsequent complaint made by respondent Nos. 6 to 12 is only with an ulterior motive to extract more money.

¶33

5

¶34

None appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 6 to 13 despite service of notice.

¶35

Learned State counsel submits that the notices have rightly been issued by the Commission and the petitioner, having received the notices, is required to appear before the Commission with relevant documents. It is argued that there is no illegality in issuance of such notices.

¶36

From perusal of the record, it appears that the dispute between the parties is essentially civil in nature arising out of a transaction of sale of land.

¶37

The powers conferred upon the Chhattisgarh Rajya Anusuchit Janjati Ayog under the provisions of the Act of 1995 are primarily recommendatory and advisory in nature. The Commission does not possess adjudicatory powers akin to a Civil Court to decide disputes relating to contractual obligations or title over property. The Commission may, upon receipt of a complaint, call for a report or seek a reply along with documents and affidavit from the concerned parties. However, after obtaining such response, it does not have the authority to repeatedly summon the parties or continue proceedings in the nature of adjudication.

¶38

In the present case, the petitioner has already submitted her reply along with affidavit and documents. Thereafter, repeated issuance of notices by the Commission directing personal appearance of

¶39

6

¶40

the petitioner is beyond the scope of its jurisdiction. Furthermore, once the entire sale consideration has been paid and a registered sale deed has been executed, any grievance of respondent Nos. 6 to 12 is required to be agitated before the competent Civil Court in accordance with law. Thus, the continued issuance of notices by respondent No. 3 is not sustainable in the eyes of law.

¶41

Accordingly, the notices dated 03.12.2020, 06.02.2021 and 16.06.2021 issued by respondent No. 3 are hereby quashed and set aside .

¶42

The writ petition is allowed .

¶43

It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. It is open to the concerned parties to avail appropriate remedy by filing a suitable application or civil suit before the competent Court in accordance with law.

¶44

sd/-

¶45

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶46

Vishakha

Alka Lakda v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alka Lakda 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

Mahesh Ram Kaiwart Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Sumit Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Meghnath Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Vidya P. Tandy Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shiv Prasad @ Paltu Chakradhari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bhagwat Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh