Dismissed

Lalit Sagarvanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC15 Sept 2026WPC/4691/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the writ petition seeking to quash proceedings under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code initiated against the petitioner. The Court observed that the petitioner failed to produce documents establishing ownership of the land. Consequently, the Court directed the petitioner to approach the concerned authority and directed the authority to hear the case independently.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to approach the concerned authority; authority directed to consider the case and pass appropriate order. Relief sought to quash proceedings refused.

Lalit Sagarvanshi Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL

CGHC010359462026

2026:CGHC:40337

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPC No. 4691 of 2026

¶8

Lalit Sagarvanshi S/o Girvar Lal Sagarvanshi Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Kutelabhata Tah. And District- Durg (C.G.)

¶9

... Petitioner(s)

¶10

versus

¶11

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.)

¶12

2 - Collector, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.)

¶13

3 - Tahsildar, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.)

¶14

4 - Additional Tahsildar, Durg, District- Durg (C.G.)

¶15

... Respondent(s)

¶16

(Cause title taken from CIS System)

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ajay Thakre, Advocate

¶18

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Verma, GA

¶19

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

16.09.2026

The petitioner has filed this petition with the following reliefs:-

¶24

“ 10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the proceedings initiated against the petitioner under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code in respective case number mentioned in the notice dated 15.06.2026 (Annexure P/1).

¶25

10.2 Any other relief or relief(s)which this Hon’ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.

¶26

Learned State Counsel submits that proceedings under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1959”) have already been initiated against the petitioner by the Additional Tahsildar, Durg, District Durg, Chhattisgarh and the petitioner is participating in the said proceedings. Therefore, the relief sought by the petitioner in the present petition cannot be granted at this stage, and the petitioner is required to approach the concerned authority before whom the proceedings are pending. He further submits that the petitioner is an encroacher over the land in question, which has already been allotted to IIT, Raipur. Accordingly, the petitioner is required to

¶27

¶28

appear before the concerned authority and remove the construction raised over the said land in accordance with law.

¶29

However, upon enquiry, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner failed to produce any document or material on record to establish that the land in question belongs to the petitioner.

¶30

Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned authority and the concerned authority is directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and it shall be upon the concerned authority to consider the matter independently and pass an appropriate order strictly in accordance with law.

¶31

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

¶32

SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶33

AMIT PATEL

Lalit Sagarvanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalit Sagarvanshi v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases