Dismissed¶31

Malikram v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC1 Mar 2026WPC/914/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Withdrawal of writ petition WPC No. 914 of 2026 (High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur) with liberty to approach competent authority under Section 250A, Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959; Article 226; alleged illegal boundary wall over roadway to petitioner's land at Village Lavsara, Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti; non-compliance with orders of Tahsildar (07.08.2024), S.D.O. (15.01.2025) and Civil Judge Junior Class Sakti (08.10.2025); private respondents Tuleshwar Sahu, Basant Sahu, Kunj Bihari; dismissed as withdrawn; pending IAs disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appropriate application under Section 250A of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned authority; pending interlocutory applications disposed of. ¶31

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the Court should direct the respondent authorities to demolish the alleged illegal construction of a wall over the roadway to the petitioner's land, secure compliance with the orders dated 07.08.2024 (Tahsildar), 15.01.2025 (S.D.O.) and 08.10.2025 (Civil Judge Junior Class, Sakti), and impose a fine on private respondents Nos. 5-7 for the illegal construction and non-compliance.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

The Court permitted the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to file an appropriate application under Section 250A of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned authority, the respondents/State having raised no objection.

¶30

Key takeaways

The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn.ratio¶31
Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stood disposed of.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ petition (WPC No. 914 of 2026, High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J., 02.03.2026) filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Malikram, seeking directions to the revenue authorities to demolish an alleged illegal wall constructed by private respondents Nos. 5-7 over the roadway to the petitioner's land, to enforce compliance with the orders dated 07.08.2024 (Tahsildar, Tahsil Naya Baradwar), 15.01.2025 (S.D.O., Sakti) and 08.10.2025 (Civil Judge Junior Class, Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa), and to fine the private respondents for non-compliance. Before adjudication, learned counsel for the petitioner sought leave to withdraw the petition with liberty to file an appropriate application under Section 250A of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 before the concerned authority; learned counsel for the respondents/State raised no objection. The Court allowed the prayer, permitted withdrawal, dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn, and disposed of pending interlocutory application(s), if any.

2026:CGHC:10796

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 914 of 2026

¶6

Malikram S/o Shri Anand Ram Aged About 66 Years Caste Teli, R/o Village Lavsara, Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶10

2 - Collector Sakti, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶11

3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Rev) Sakti, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶12

4 - Tahsildar Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶13

5 - Tuleshwar Sahu S/o Anand Ram Aged About 70 Years Caste Teli, R/o Village Lavsara, Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

6 - Basant Sahu S/o Shri Tuleshwar Sahu Aged About 50 Years Caste Teli, R/o Village Lavsara, Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶15

7 - Kunj Bihari S/o Shri Tuleshwar Sahu Aged About 40 Years Caste Teli, R/o Village Lavsara, Tahsil Naya Baradwar, Distt. Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. Jai Kumar Dewangan, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 4/State : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Advocate

¶18

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)

¶19

Order on Board

¶20

02.3.2026

¶21

1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:-

¶22

“(i) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue strictly direction to the respondent authorities to demolish the

¶23

Digitally signed by BINI BINI PRADEEP PRADEEP Date: 2026.03.03 11:08:23 +0530

¶24

¶25

illegal construction of WALL over the road way to the petitioner's land for compliance of order dated 08.10.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Class Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh, orders dated 15.01.2025 passed by the respondent /S.D.O., order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the respondent /Tahsildar at the earliest.

¶26

(ii) That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to punish the fine to the private respondents no. 5 7 for illegal construction of boundary wall over the road of the petitioner's land and for non-compliance of the order dated 15.01.2025 passed by the respondent /S.D.O., order dated 07.08.2024 passed by the respondent /Tahsildar and order dated 08.10.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge Junior Class Sakti, District Janjgir -Champa Chhattisgarh.

¶27

(iii) Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

¶28

2. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file appropriate application under Section 250A of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, before concerned authority.

¶29

3. Learned counsel for the respondents/State has no objection on the above prayer.

¶30

4. On due consideration, prayer is allowed and he is permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty as prayed for.

¶31

5. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶32

6. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)