Disposed

Gram Panchayat Silphili v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC17 Sept 2026WPC/4743/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gram Panchayat Silphili sought directions for removal of alleged illegal encroachment and unauthorized construction by respondents 5 to 7 on government land (Khasra Nos. 515 and 516) used as a public market (Shanivar Bazar), and for expeditious conclusion of pending revenue proceedings. The High Court directed the Collector (respondent no. 2) to decide the pending revenue case within 60 days, maintaining status quo until then, without expressing any opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent no. 2 (Collector) to decide pending revenue proceedings within 60 days; status quo on nature and possession of property to be maintained until decision; petitioner at liberty to submit fresh representation with copy of order.

Gram Panchayat Silphili Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Property and Title | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

Digitally signed by YOGESHTIWARI YOGESH TIWARIDate: 2026.09.2117:35:23 +0530 CGHC010361522026

¶3

2026:CGHC:40732

¶4

NAFR

¶5

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 4743 of 2026

¶7

Gram Panchayat Silphili Through Its Sarpanch Smt. Amrita Markam, Aged About 34 Years, W/o Shri Jivan Markam, R/o Silphili Karsi, Po Karsi, District Surajpur (C.G.)

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

versus

¶10

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector, Surajpur District Surajpur (C.G.)

¶11

3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh

¶12

4 - Tehsildar Pratappur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh

¶13

5 - Aklim Ansari S/o Phakira Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Silphili, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶14

6 - Samim Ansari S/o Mansur Aged About 35 Years R/o Village Silphili, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶15

7 - Sabir S/o Rahmat Aged About 75 Years R/o Village Silphili Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

¶18

For Petitioner : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Advocate For State : Mr. Priyank Rathi, Govt. Advocate

¶19

Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board

¶20

18.09.2026

¶21

1. By filing the present petition, the petitioner-Gram Panchayat seeks appropriate directions to the respondent authorities for removal of

¶22

¶23

the alleged illegal encroachment and unauthorized construction raised by respondent Nos. 5 to 7 over Government land bearing Khasra Nos. 515 and 516, situated at Village Silphili, Tehsil Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.), which is being utilized for the public market known as “Shanivar Bazar”, and for expeditious conclusion of the pending revenue proceedings in accordance with law. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

¶24

“10.1. That, the entire records pertaining to the revenue case no. रा� . प्र . क्र .202108260700008/ ब -121/2020-2021 be called for the purpose of conclusive and expeditious disposal of the present writ petition, and/or

¶25

10.2. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 to forthwith remove the illegal encroachment and unauthorised construction raised by Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 over the government market land bearing Khasra No. 515 and Khasra No. 516, Village Silphili, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.);

¶26

10.3. That, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to conclude the proceedings in revenue case no. रा� . प्र . क्र .-202108260700008/ ब -121/2020-2021 within the stipulated time;

¶27

10.4. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to Issue appropriate writ, order or direction, restraining Respondent Nos. 5 to 7

¶28

¶29

from raising any further construction over or otherwise interfering with the government market land bearing Khasra Nos. 515 and 516, Village Silphili, Tahsil Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.);

¶30

10.5. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant compensation of Rupees fifty thousand to the petitioner.

¶31

10.6. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed. ”

¶32

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid land is recorded as Government land and is being utilized for the public market, and respondent Nos. 5 to 7 have allegedly encroached upon the said land and raised unauthorized construction thereon. It is submitted that the petitioner-Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution dated 29.07.2021 seeking removal of the encroachment and, pursuant thereto, notice was also issued by the concerned Tehsildar on 16.08.2021. Thereafter, respondent Nos. 5 to 7 approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 4763/2021, wherein this Court, vide order dated 25.11.2021, directed the Collector to consider their representation and take a decision thereon within 60 days, with an interim direction to maintain status quo till such decision. It is further submitted that despite the aforesaid order, the proceedings have not been brought to their logical conclusion and the alleged unauthorized construction has continued over the Government market land.

¶33

¶34

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner-Gram Panchayat that the land bearing Khasra Nos. 515 and 516, situated at Village Silphili, Tehsil Pratappur, District Surajpur (C.G.), is recorded as Government land and is being utilized for the public market known as “Shanivar Bazar”. It is submitted that respondent Nos. 5 to 7 have allegedly encroached upon the said Government land and have raised unauthorized construction thereon. It is further submitted that the petitioner-Gram Panchayat had passed a resolution dated 29.07.2021 seeking removal of the encroachment, pursuant to which notice was also issued by the concerned Tehsildar on 16.08.2021. It is submitted that respondent Nos. 5 to 7 thereafter approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 4763/2021, wherein, vide order dated 25.11.2021, the Collector was directed to consider their representation and take a decision thereon within a period of 60 days, with an interim direction to maintain status quo till such decision. Learned counsel submits that the revenue proceedings are still pending and have not been brought to their logical conclusion. Therefore, it is prayed that the competent authority may be directed to conclude the pending proceedings and take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶35

4. Learned State counsel, on the other hand, submits that the matter is pending before the competent revenue authority and the allegations regarding encroachment and unauthorized construction are required to be considered in accordance with the

¶36

¶37

applicable revenue provisions. It is further submitted that appropriate orders would be passed by the competent authority after considering the claim and objections of the concerned parties.

¶38

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

¶39

6. Considering the fact that revenue proceedings in Revenue Case No. 202108260700008/ब - 121/2020-2021 are stated to be pending before the competent authority, this Court is of the view that the said proceedings deserve to be brought to their logical conclusion in accordance with law. Accordingly, respondent No.2/competent authority is directed to consider and decide the pending revenue proceedings expeditiously, preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after affording due opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties.

¶40

7. Till the aforesaid proceedings are decided, the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the nature and possession of the property in question.

¶41

8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims or on the alleged encroachment/unauthorized construction, and the competent authority shall take an independent decision strictly in accordance with law.

¶42

¶43

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

¶44

10. The petitioner shall be at liberty to submit a fresh representation, along with a copy of this order, before the competent authority for expeditious consideration.

¶45

Sd/-

¶46

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge

¶47

Yogesh

Gram Panchayat Silphili v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gram Panchayat Silphili 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases