Mohammed Yunus v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC7 Jan 2026WPC/46/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Chhattisgarh High Court Bilaspur; WPC No. 46 of 2026; Article 226 Constitution of India; land demarcation; Khasra No. 120/37; 0.40 acre; Village Jairamnagar; Tahsil Masturi; District Bilaspur; Board of Revenue order dated 04.06.2025; Revenue Revision Case No. R.N./02/R/A-70/287/2023; government land bearing 110/3; Tahsildar Masturi; notice to appear 16.01.2026; demarcation within one month; report to parties; parties to cooperate; Narendra Kumar Vyas; writ petition disposed; NAFR.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Tahsildar to conclude the demarcation in presence of the parties within one month from 16.01.2026 and supply its report to the parties; parties directed to cooperate with the revenue authorities in the process of demarcation. ¶¶31

Mohammed Yunus Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Writ and Judicial Review | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether a direction should be issued to the respondent authorities to carry out the demarcation of the petitioner's land bearing Khasra No. 120/37, area 0.40 acre, situated at Village Jairamnagar, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.), which allegedly remained undemarcated despite the Board of Revenue order dated 04.06.2025 in Revenue Revision Case No. R.N./02/R/A-70/287/2023.

¶¶24

Court's answer

Since notices have been issued to the parties by the Tahsildar, no direction is required to be issued to him at this stage.

¶¶30

Ratio / Principle

The Tahsildar is directed to conclude the demarcation in presence of the parties within one month from 16.01.2026 and supply its report to the parties.

¶¶30

Key takeaways

The parties are directed to cooperate with the revenue authorities in the process of demarcation.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPC No. 46 of 2026) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by Mohammed Yunus before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, seeking a direction to the respondent revenue authorities to demarcate his land bearing Khasra No. 120/37, area 0.40 acre, at Village Jairamnagar, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.). Counsel submitted that despite the Board of Revenue order dated 04.06.2025 in Revenue Revision Case No. R.N./02/R/A-70/287/2023, the petitioner's land and the adjoining government land bearing 110/3 had not been demarcated even after nine months. Learned State counsel informed the Court that the Tahsildar had already issued notice to the parties to appear on 16.01.2026 for demarcation. The Court held that no further direction was required at that stage, but directed the Tahsildar to conclude the demarcation in the presence of the parties within one month from 16.01.2026 and to supply its report to the parties, and directed the parties to cooperate with the revenue authorities. The writ petition stood disposed. Coram: Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas; order dated 08/01/2026.

2026:CGHC:1148

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 46 of 2026

¶6

1 - Mohammed Yunus S/o Mohammed Yusuf Aged About 40 Years R/o Sindhu Bhawan Dharmshala, Nearby Santoshi Mandi, Torwa, Tehsil And District Bilaspur C.G.,

¶7

Through General Power Of Attorney Holder Raja Goswami S/o Shri Ramchandra Goswami Aged About 47 Years, R/o Tehsildar Gali Hemu Nagar, Police Station- Torwa Bilaspur, Tehsil And District Bilaspur C.G.

¶8

... Petitioner(s)

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur C.G.

¶11

2 - Board Of Revenue, Circuit Court Bilaspur, Through Its Member, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶12

3 - Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶13

4 - Collector, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶14

5 - Sub-Divisional Officer, Revenue, Masturi, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶15

6 - Tehsildar, Masturi, District Bilaspur C.G.

¶16

7 - Santram S/o Budhari Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Bhanesar, Tehsil And District Bilaspur C.G.

¶17

8 - Rajna W/o Omprakash Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Bhanesar, Tehsil And District Bilaspur C.G.

¶18

... Respondents

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr. Gagan Pandey, Advocate.

¶20

For State : Mr. Vivek Verma, Govt. Advocate.

¶21

Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas

¶22

Order on Board

¶23

08/01/2026

¶24

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities to carry out the demarcation of petitioner’s land bearing Khasra No. 120/37 area admeasuring 0.40 acre situated at VillageJairamnagar, Tahsil- Masturi, District- Bilaspur (C.G.).

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the Board of

¶26

Digitally signed by ARUN ARUN KUMAR KUMAR DEWANGAN DEWANGAN Date: 2026.01.08 17:59:48 +0530

¶27

¶28

Revenue vide order dated 04.06.2025 in Revenue Revision Case No. R.N./02/R/A-70/287/2023, the petitioner’s land aforestated and the government land bearing 110/3 have not been demarcated even after lapse of 9 months and would pray for issuance of direction to the respondent authorities in this regard.

¶29

Learned State counsel on instruction would submit that the Tahsildar has already issued notice to the parties to appear on 16.01.2026 for demarcation of the land, therefore, nothing requires to be adjudicated in this petition at this stage.

¶30

Since notices have been issued to the parties by the Tahsildar, no direction is required to be issued to him at this stage. However, the Tahsildar is directed to conclude the demarcation in presence of the parties within one month from 16.01.2026 and supply its report to the parties. The parties are directed to the cooperate the revenue authorities in process of demarcation.

¶31

In view of the above, the instant writ petition stands disposed.

¶32

Sd/(Narendra Kumar Vyas) Judge

¶33

Arun

Mohammed Yunus v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Yunus 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

Budhram Vs the National Highway Authority of India

Idfc First Bank Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Idfc First Bank Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Dilip Kumar Sen Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kamleshwar Singh Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Ramesh Tiwari Vs State of Chhattisgarh