AJAY BANJARE vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1


CGHC010387832024 2026:CGHC:45502

NAFR
Digitally
signed by
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5650 of 2024
Order Reserved on: 18.8.2026
Order Delivered on: 27.10.2026
Ajay Banjare S/o Bed Ram Banjare Aged About 30 Years Director
•
Pragati Computer Education Center, Having Its Office At Village
Adbhar, District Sakti, Chhattisgarh. Permanent R/o Ward No. 12,
Village- Bade Padarmuda, Tehsil Malkharoda, District : Janjgir-
Champa, Chhattisgarh.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Government Of
Chhattisgarh, Urban Administration And Development
Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa
Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2. Collector Sakti, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
3. Tehsildar Village- Adbhar, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
4. Nayab Tehsildar Village- Adbhar, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh.

2
5. Nagar Panchayat Adbhar Through Its Chief Municipal Officer,
Village- Adbhar, District : Sakti, Chhattisgarh.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Meena Shastri, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) No. 1 to 4/
: Mr. Anway Tiwari, Panel Lawyer.
State
For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Advocate.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
C A V Order
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:-
“10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
call for the entire records pertaining to the present case.
10.2 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to
issue a writ, order or direction of Mandamus quashing
the impugned notice dated 14.10.2024 and the impugned
order dated 04.10.2024 [Annexure P-1] passed by the
respondent authorities respectively in the light of facts
and circumstance of the case.
10.3 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
issue a writ, order or direction of mandamus directing the
respondent authorities to not demolish the under-
construction building raised by the petitioner and allow

3
the petitioner to complete the construction over the land
alloted by the Nagar Panchayat.
10.4 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be please to issue
a writ order or direction of mandamus to decide the
pending application made by the petitioner for grant of
lease over which the petitioner has raised construction
which is pending before the Learned Collector, Sakti and
to decided within such time frame as the Hon'ble may
deems fit in the light of fact and circumstances of the
case.
10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
grant any other relief(s), which it may deemed fit and
proper in the aforesaid facts Jand circumstances of the
case.”
2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the present petition has been
preferred against the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondent
authorities in issuing a notice for eviction and demolition of the
construction raised over the land duly allotted to the petitioner by
the Nagar Panchayat, Adbhar, vide resolution dated 12.06.2023.
The said land was allotted to the petitioner for establishing a
computer education centre for the villagers and for imparting
computer education to the local residents at a nominal fee, with
the object of benefiting the residents of the village. It is further
submitted that the petitioner has also provided free computer

4
education to certain students who were unable to afford even the
minimum prescribed fee. Pursuant to the allotment, the petitioner
commenced construction over the allotted land for establishing the
computer education centre. However, in December 2023, after a
change in the political scenario in the State, certain local villagers
allegedly threatened the petitioner and demanded certain favours
from him, which the petitioner declined. Consequently, a complaint
was lodged before the Tehsildar, Adbhar, objecting to the
construction raised by the petitioner. Acting upon the said
complaint, the Tehsildar, Adbhar, illegally declared the petitioner to
be an encroacher and directed removal of the construction,
besides issuing an eviction warrant requiring the petitioner to
remove the said construction. Subsequently, vide orders/notices
dated 04.10.2024 and 14.10.2024, the respondent authorities
directed removal of the construction by treating the same as an
encroachment and thereafter proceeded to issue the eviction
warrant. It is submitted that the respondent authorities are now
proceeding to demolish the construction by illegally treating the
petitioner as an encroacher, despite the fact that the land had
been duly allotted to him by the Nagar Panchayat, Adbhar, vide its
resolution dated 12.06.2023. Aggrieved by the aforesaid illegal
and arbitrary action of the respondent authorities, the petitioner
has preferred the instant petition seeking appropriate relief from
this Court.

5
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
established “Pragati Computer Education Centre” at Village
Adbhar in the year 2022 with the bona fide object of imparting
computer education to the residents of the village and nearby
areas at a minimum and affordable fee and, in deserving cases,
even free of cost. It is submitted that, since its inception, more
than 300 persons have successfully completed various courses
and at present about 100 students are enrolled in the centre. As
the rented premises became insufficient due to the increasing
number of students and the requirement of additional space for
installing computers and other infrastructure, the petitioner
approached the President of Nagar Panchayat, Adbhar, on
04.02.2023 seeking allotment of suitable land for establishing a
permanent computer education centre. The Nagar Panchayat
considered the request and, vide Resolution dated 12.06.2023,
unanimously resolved to allot 2.5 dismil of land situated near the
Electricity Office to the petitioner for the said purpose, whereafter
the site was duly identified and the petitioner commenced
construction after performing Bhoomipoojan in the presence of
members of the Nagar Panchayat. Learned counsel submits that
the subject land forms part of Khasra No. 162/1 and that the
petitioner proceeded with the construction bona fide and in
pursuance of the allotment made by the Nagar Panchayat, without
any intention to encroach upon government land. It is further
submitted that after the declaration of the Legislative Assembly

6
election results on 03.12.2023, certain local villagers allegedly
threatened the petitioner and demanded certain favours, which he
declined, and thereafter a complaint was lodged before the
Tehsildar, Adbhar, on 12.12.2023 alleging unauthorised
construction. Pursuant thereto, revenue proceedings were
initiated and the Patwari submitted his report on 20.12.2023.
Thereafter, vide order dated 27.12.2023, the Tehsildar directed the
petitioner to stop the construction and submit his explanation. The
petitioner immediately complied with the said direction, stopped
further construction and submitted his reply explaining the
allotment made by the Nagar Panchayat. Learned counsel further
submits that during the pendency of the proceedings, the
petitioner also approached the competent authority seeking grant
of lease of the subject land. However, without seeking any
explanation from the Nagar Panchayat regarding the allotment
made by it, the Tehsildar proceeded to treat the petitioner as an
encroacher and directed removal of the construction. It is
contended that the said action is arbitrary and unsustainable,
particularly when the petitioner had acted pursuant to a formal
resolution of the Nagar Panchayat and had utilised the land for a
bona fide social and educational purpose. Learned counsel
submits that the petitioner has invested his hard-earned savings
for establishing the computer education centre and its demolition
would cause irreparable loss to him and would also defeat the
larger public and social object of providing affordable computer

7
education to the villagers. It is, therefore, submitted that the
respondent authorities ought not to demolish the existing structure
and may be directed to consider the petitioner's request for grant
of lease in respect of the subject land in accordance with law
before taking any coercive action against him.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that the land bearing
Khasra No. 162/1, admeasuring 19.6390 hectares (48.53 acres),
is recorded as “Chhote Jhad Ka Jungle (Grass)” and continues to
be recorded as Government land in the revenue records. It is
submitted that the petitioner has no lawful right or authority over
the subject land, as the same was never allotted to him by the
competent authority. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner
is relying upon a resolution passed by the Nagar Panchayat,
Adbhar, whereas the Nagar Panchayat was not competent to allot
Government land and the competent authority for such allotment
is the District Collector. It is further submitted that on a complaint
alleging encroachment, the Tahsildar, Adbhar, initiated revenue
proceedings, issued notice to the petitioner and called for a report
from the concerned Halka Patwari, who reported that the
petitioner had raised construction over the subject land without
obtaining permission from the competent authority. Learned
counsel submits that the petitioner appeared before the Tahsildar
and submitted his reply, which was duly considered, and
thereafter the Tahsildar, upon appreciation of the material
available on record, passed the eviction order dated 04.10.2024

8
holding the petitioner to be an encroacher and directing removal
of the encroachment. It is further submitted that the petitioner
challenged the said order before the Sub-Divisional Officer
(Revenue), Malkharoda, under Section 44 of the Land Revenue
Code, but the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 06.03.2025,
which has neither been challenged nor assailed in the present
petition. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner's
application for allotment/lease of the subject land was also
considered and rejected by the Collector, District Sakti, vide order
dated 30.05.2025, which too has not been challenged. It is,
therefore, contended that the petitioner cannot claim any legal
right over the Government land merely on the basis of a resolution
passed by an authority lacking competence to make such
allotment. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner, having
failed to establish any valid allotment, lease or permission in his
favour, is an encroacher and cannot claim regularisation or lease
as a matter of right. The eviction order and consequential notice
having been passed after due opportunity of hearing and in
accordance with law, do not warrant any interference by this
Hon’ble Court. The present petition, therefore, being devoid of
merit, deserves to be dismissed.
5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 5 submits that the petitioner's
entire claim rests upon Resolution No. 38 dated 12.06.2023,
which merely refers to allotment of 2.5 dismil of land near the
Electricity Office, without specifying any Khasra number,

9
ownership, location or other particulars identifying the land. It is,
therefore, contended that the said resolution does not establish
any right of the petitioner over the subject land. Learned counsel
further submits that the petitioner himself applied before the
Collector, District Sakti, for grant of lease of the subject land,
which demonstrates that he was aware that no lawful right had
accrued in his favour. It is further submitted that respondent No. 5
had no authority to allot Government land and that no valid
allotment of the subject land was ever made in favour of the
petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that, even assuming that
the petitioner was intended to be allotted land for running a
computer education centre, he could not have raised construction
without obtaining the requisite permission from the competent
authority, which he has failed to establish. Accordingly, it is
submitted that the petitioner has no enforceable right over the
subject land and is not entitled to the reliefs claimed in the present
petition, which deserves to be dismissed.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused
the material available on record.
7. From the perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner had
submitted certain applications before the Nagar Panchayat,
Adbhar, seeking allotment of land for construction of a building for
imparting computer education to the local residents. It further
appears that the Nagar Panchayat, Adbhar, had passed a
resolution in favour of the petitioner; however, the requisite

10
allotment process was not completed in accordance with law, and
the petitioner, merely on the basis of the said resolution, is
claiming a right over the subject land. Since the land in question
belongs to the State Government, the construction raised by the
petitioner cannot be treated as lawful unless and until the land is
duly allotted or leased in his favour by the competent authority.
The petitioner ought to have obtained the requisite patta or lease,
whether temporary or permanent, from the competent revenue
authority before raising any construction. In the absence of any
such valid allotment or lease, the construction raised by the
petitioner cannot be permitted to continue merely on the strength
of the resolution passed by the Nagar Panchayat.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly
the fact that the petitioner has already raised construction and is
imparting computer education to the local residents, this Court
deems it appropriate to grant an opportunity to the petitioner to
seek appropriate allotment/lease of the subject land. Accordingly,
the petitioner is directed to submit an appropriate application
before the competent revenue authorities, namely, the
Tahsildar/SDO and the Collector, seeking grant of lease of the
land for the purpose of establishing and running the computer
training centre. The concerned authorities shall consider the said
application in accordance with law and, while doing so, shall adopt
a pragmatic approach keeping in view the special circumstances
of the case, particularly the fact that the petitioner seeks to run a

11
computer education centre which would benefit the local villagers
and students. The authorities shall thereafter pass an appropriate
and reasoned order on the petitioner's application in accordance
with law.
9. The impugned notice dated 14.10.2024 is modified to the
aforesaid extent. Since this Court, vide order dated 14.11.2024,
had stayed the effect and operation of the impugned notice, the
petitioner is directed to submit the appropriate application before
the concerned authorities within a period of 30 days from the date
of receipt of a copy of this order, and, in turn, the concerned
authorities shall consider and decide the same, in accordance
with law, within a further period of 60 days. It is made clear that
the petitioner shall abide by the decision of the competent
authority on his application for grant of lease.
10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ
petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Raghu Jat