NAMENDRA SAHU vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010375412024 2026:CGHC:45481
NAFR
Digitally
signed by
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
RAGHVENDRA
JAT
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 5524 of 2024
1 - Namendra Sahu S/o Late Neelcharan Sahu Aged About 54 Years
R/o Village- Murata, P.S. And Tahsil- Nawagarh, Distt. Bemetara, C.G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of
Revenue, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,
Distt. Raipur, C.G.
2 - The Collector Bemetara, Distt. Bemetara, C.G.
3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) Nawagarh, Distt. Bemetara, C.G.
4 - The Tehsildar Nawagarh, Distt. Bemetara, C.G.
5 - Premu Sahu S/o Dhanrwar Sahu Aged About 55 Years Association
Nawagarh, R/o Office Of The Opposite Police Station, Tahsil Sahu
Association, Nawagarh, Distt. Bemetara, C.G.
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer.
For Interveners : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate.
For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Pawan Shrivastava, Advocate.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board
28/10/2026
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following
reliefs:-

2
“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call
the records pertaining to the case from the respondent
authorities.
10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-
aside the whole case of Revenue Case No.
202408230800024/2023-2024, which registered and
pending before the respondent no. 4.
10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-
aside the impugned registration order dated 23.08.2024
and also order dated 16.10.2024 passed by the
respondent no. 4 and further may kindly be pleased to
allow application for preliminary objection, in the interest of
justice.
10.4 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and
just in the facts and circumstances of the case including
award of the cost of the petitioner may be given.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a civil suit
concerning the subject matter of the present writ petition has
already been instituted and is pending consideration before the
competent civil court. He further submits that, despite the
pendency of the said civil suit, proceedings under Section 248 of
the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, have been initiated
by the concerned Tahsildar in respect of the same subject matter.
Learned counsel contends that the initiation of such proceedings
is without jurisdiction, as the Tahsildar lacks the authority to initiate
proceedings under Section 248 of the Code in the facts and
circumstances of the present case. He, therefore, submits that the
proceedings initiated by the Tahsildar are legally unsustainable
and liable to be quashed, and prays that appropriate relief be

3
granted to the petitioner in accordance with law.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State as
well as respondent No. 5 opposes the submissions made by
learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the civil suit
instituted by the petitioner was for seeking an injunction in respect
of the subject matter, and no injunction has been granted in favour
of the petitioner by the competent civil court. Learned counsel
further submits that, despite the pendency of the civil suit and the
absence of any interim injunction in favour of the petitioner, the
petitioner has approached this Court by way of the present writ
petition seeking substantially similar relief. He further contends
that the Tahsildar is legally competent and has the requisite
jurisdiction to initiate proceedings under Section 248 of the
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, in accordance with the
provisions of the said Code. Learned counsel also submits that
the petitioner has challenged the impugned order by filing a
revision before the competent authority and, therefore, the
petitioner has already availed the appropriate statutory remedy
available under the law. Accordingly, they opposes the writ petition
and submits that no interference by this Court is warranted in the
facts and circumstances of the present case.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused
the material available on record.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused

4
the material available on record, it appears that the dispute
regarding title, partition and permanent injunction is pending
before the concerned Civil Court. As such, the concerned
Tahsildar ought not to have proceeded further with the
proceedings and should have awaited the decision of the
concerned Civil Court. Accordingly, at this stage, the proceedings
initiated before the concerned Tahsildar, Nawagarh, District
Bemetara, are not required to be continued and are hereby
quashed. However, after the decision in the civil suit, the parties
shall be at liberty to file an appropriate application before the
concerned Tahsildar, who shall decide the same in accordance
with law and in the light of the decision rendered by the Civil
Court, as the judgments and orders passed by the Civil Courts are
binding on the Revenue Courts. Since the petitioner has already
filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of
Civil Procedure before the concerned Civil Court, the petitioner
may pursue the remedy available before the said Court.
6. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is
disposed of.
7. The interim application filed in the matter is also disposed of, as
the writ petition itself has been decided by this Court.
SD/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Raghu Jat