Shiv Prasad @ Paltu Chakradhari Vs State of Chhattisgarh

¶1

1

¶2

Digitally signed by SHAYNA KADRI

¶3

2026:CGHC:17686

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 3486 of 2021

¶7

1 - Shiv Prasad @ Paltu Chakradhari S/o Shri Rungu Prasad Chakradhari Aged About 43 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶8

2 - Ramkumar Chakradhari S/o Goverdhan Chakradhari Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶9

3 - Jethuram Chakradhari S/o Goverdhan Chakradhari Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶10

4 - Pardeshi Chakradhari S/o Luduram Chakradhari Aged About 57 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶11

5 - Shiv Kumar Chakradhari S/o Ruguram Chakradhari Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶12

2

¶13

6 - Gulab Chakradhari S/o Barati Chakradhari Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶14

7 - Anuj Kumar Chakradhari S/o Baghela Chakradhari Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶15

8 - Khubi Ram Chakradhari S/o Manrakhan Chakradhari Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶16

9 - Ganesh Ram Chakradhari S/o Jhulu Ram Chakradhari Aged About 72 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶17

10 - Kheman Prasad Chakradhari S/o Sobharam Chakradhari Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶18

11 - Dauvaram Chakradhari S/o Shri Manrakhan Chakradhari Aged About 62 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶19

12 - Ramkhilawan Chakradhari S/o Shri Manrakhan Chakradhari Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶20

3

¶21

13 - Vikram Alias Narendra Kumar Chakradhari S/o Motiram Chakradhari Aged About 32 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶22

14 - Manglu Ram Chakradhari S/o Shri Jhanglu Chakradhari Aged About 67 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶23

15 - Ganeshuram Chakradhari S/o Late Luluram Chakradhari Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶24

16 - Chhabi Chakradhari S/o Ghanshyam Chakradhari Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶25

17 - Taturam Chakradhari S/o Bhagela Chakradhari Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : BalodabazarBhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶26

18 - Sitaram S/o Shri Manrakhan Chakradhari Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Lawar, Tahsil Simga, Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶27

... Petitioners

¶28

versus

¶29

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Revenue, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶30

4

¶31

2 - The Collector District Balodabazar Bhatapara., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶32

3 - The Tahsildar Simga, District Balodabazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶33

4 - Gram Panchayat Lawar Through Its Sarpanch, Tahsil Simga, District Balodabazar., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh

¶34

... Respondent(s)

¶35

(Cause Title is taken from CIS System)

¶36

For Petitioners	: Mr. Harsh Mandar Rastogi, Advocate holding brief on behalf of Ms. Supriya Upasane, Advocate
For State	: Mr. Ujjawal Choubey, Panel Lawyer

¶37

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

¶38

Order on Board

¶39

17/04/2026

¶40

The petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following

¶41

reliefs:

¶42

“a. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to call for the records from the respondents concerned pertaining to the case of the petitioners for perusal of this Hon'ble Court, if this Hon'ble Court thinks fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶43

b. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order quashing the memo dated 5.7.2021 issued by the respondent Tahsildar, Simga being perverse and not sustainable in law.

¶44

5

¶45

c. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to pass an order directing the respondent authority concerned to issue lease in favour of the petitioners in respect of the land in question in their possession in the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶46

d. Cost of the proceedings.

¶47

e. Any other writs and directions that may be deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of case.”

¶48

Facts of the case, as emerging from the writ petition, are that the petitioners belong to the traditional potter (kumhaar) community and are engaged in their occupation as potters for earning their livelihood. The State Government, with a view to promote and sustain the traditional cottage industry of the potter community, issued a memo dated 26.09.2006 directing all Collectors in the State to ensure reservation of 5 acres of land in every Gram Panchayat for members of the potter community. In furtherance of the said policy decision, action was taken under Section 237 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, and directions were issued to reserve suitable land for the said purpose. Pursuant thereto, respondent No.4, in its meeting dated 01.06.2007, earmarked and reserved five acres of land for the potter community. Prior to such reservation, the petitioners had already submitted an application seeking allotment of land admeasuring approximately 2 hectares bearing Khasra No. 286 situated at

¶49

6

¶50

Patwari Halka No. 19. Upon receipt of the application, due process was initiated, including issuance of a proclamation inviting objections from the public. Despite completion of the preliminary process and reservation of land for the potter community, no formal lease/allotment was granted in favour of the petitioners for a considerable period. The petitioners, being in possession of the said land and carrying out their traditional occupation thereon, made several representations to the concerned authorities, including the Member of Legislative Assembly and revenue authorities, seeking grant of lease rights. While the matter of allotment was still pending consideration and objections had already been invited, the respondent Tahsildar abruptly issued a memo dated 05.07.2021 under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, treating the petitioners as encroachers and directing removal of their possession from the land in question. It is further evident from the panchnama dated 08.07.2021 that the land admeasuring five acres reserved for the potter community was acknowledged, and encroachments on other portions of land were removed, thereby indicating the distinct identification of land meant for the petitioners’ community. Aggrieved by the sudden initiation of eviction proceedings despite the subsisting policy decision and pending application for allotment, the petitioners have approached this Court.

¶51

7

¶52

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are members of the potter community and are traditionally engaged in their occupation for sustaining their livelihood. It is contended that the State Government, vide memo dated 26.09.2006, has taken a conscious policy decision to allot 5 acres of land in every Gram Panchayat to the potter community so as to promote their traditional occupation. It is further submitted that, in pursuance of the said decision and in exercise of powers under Section 237 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, the concerned Collectors were directed to reserve suitable land for the potter community. Accordingly, the land in question has already been earmarked and reserved for the petitioners’ community by the competent authority. Learned counsel submits that the petitioners are in settled and peaceful possession of the said land and have been carrying out their occupational activities therefrom for a long period. In light of the reservation of land and their possession, the petitioners have also applied for formal allotment/lease of the said land, which is still pending consideration before the competent authority. It is emphasized that even objections were invited in respect of such allotment, thereby indicating that due process is underway. It is vehemently argued that, during the pendency of the petitioners’ application for allotment, the respondent Tahsildar has illegally issued a notice under Section 248 of the Code for removal of alleged encroachment, which is arbitrary, unjustified,

¶53

8

¶54

and contrary to the State Government’s own policy decision. Learned counsel contends that the petitioners cannot be treated as encroachers when the land has already been reserved for their community pursuant to a valid governmental decision and when their applications for allotment are pending consideration. The impugned action, therefore, is perverse and liable to be set aside. It is lastly submitted that if the petitioners are dispossessed from the land in question, they will be deprived of their sole source of livelihood and would be rendered destitute, causing irreparable hardship, especially in the prevailing socio-economic conditions. Hence, interference by this Court under its writ jurisdiction is warranted.

¶55

Learned State counsel opposes the submissions of the petitioners and contends that mere reservation of land pursuant to Government memo dated 26.09.2006 does not confer any legal right, title or interest in favour of the petitioners unless a formal allotment/lease is granted in accordance with law. It is submitted that the petitioners are unauthorized occupants over Government land and are rightly proceeded against under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code. The action of the Tahsildar is in accordance with law and no interference is warranted by this Court.

¶56

I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and have perused the material available on record.

¶57

9

¶58

It is not in dispute that the State Government, vide memo dated 26.09.2006, has taken a policy decision for reservation of 5 acres of land in every Gram Panchayat for the benefit of the potter community so as to promote their traditional occupation. It is also apparent that pursuant to such policy decision, the land in question has been earmarked for the said purpose and the petitioners, who belong to the potter community, are stated to be in possession and have already applied for allotment, which is still pending consideration.

¶59

Considering the aforesaid factual matrix and without entering into the merits of the rival claims, this Court is of the opinion that ends of justice would be met if the competent authorities are directed to take a decision in light of the aforesaid Government policy. Accordingly, the concerned authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioners in terms of memo dated 05.09.2006 and take an appropriate decision with regard to allotment of land in question, strictly in accordance with law.

¶60

It is made clear that such exercise shall be undertaken after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties of the village and after inviting and considering objections, if any. It is further directed that till finalization of the aforesaid exercise, the petitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land in question. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 60 days from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.

¶61

10

¶62

The petitioners are directed to produce a copy of this order along with all relevant documents before the competent authority within a period of 15 days from today.

¶63

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

¶64

No order as to costs.

¶65

Sd/-

¶66

Shayna

¶67

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

Shiv Prasad @ Paltu Chakradhari v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Prasad @ Paltu Chakradhari 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

Bhagwat Das Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Maniram Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh