PRABAL SAI PAIKRA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010343292026 2026:CGHC:39272
Digitally signed
by YOGESH
TIWARI
Date: 2026.09.08
17:26:06 +0530
YOGESH
TIWARI
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 4544 of 2026
Prabal Sai Paikra S/o Shri Bijeshwar Paikra, Aged About 68 Years R/o
Ward, No. 13, Nagar Panchayat Pamgarh, Police Station And Tehsil
Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa, C. G.
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Department Of
Revenue Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar
Raipur District Raipur C. G.
2 - Collector Janjgir District Janjgir Champa, C. G.
3 - Sub Divisional Office (Revenue) Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa,
C. G.
4 - Tehsildar Pamgarh, Tehsil Pamgarh, District Janjgir Champa C. G.
... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Ramesh Nayak, Advocate
For State/Respondents : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, P.L.
Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge
Order on Board
08.09.2026
1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner calls in question
the legality and validity of the impugned order dated 30.07.2026
(Annexure P-14) passed by respondent No.2 in Revenue Case

2
No. 202605061100012/A-21/2025-26, whereby the petitioner's
application seeking permission under Section 165(6)(ii) of the
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 for sale of land bearing
Khasra No.294/8, situated at Village Pamgarh, Tahsil Pamgarh,
District Janjgir-Champa, has been rejected. The petitioner has
prayed for the following reliefs:-
“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to
direct the respondents to place all the records
of the case for kind perusal of the Hon'ble
Court.
10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to
quash the impugned order dated 30.07.2026
(Annexure P-14) passed in Revenue Case
No. 202605061100012/A-21/2025-26 by the
respondent no. 2.
10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may further be
pleased to direct the respondent authorities to
provide permission to the petitioner for sale of
the land bearing Khasra No. 294/8 situated at
revenue village Pamgarh, Tahsil Pamgarh,
District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).
10.4 That, such other relief's as the Hon'ble
Court deems fit in the circumstances of the
case also be granted to the Petitioner.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application
seeking permission for sale of the subject land has been rejected
on the ground that, after sale of the said land, the petitioner would
not have any other land at Pamgarh. It is submitted that the

3
petitioner is an old-aged person and is suffering from paralysis
and, owing to his medical condition, requires substantial funds for
his treatment and medical expenses. Learned counsel further
submits that the petitioner is having ancestral property at Village
Gaarighat, District Jashpur, and intends to utilise the sale
consideration of the subject land for obtaining better medical
treatment and meeting his financial requirements.
3. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions
advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that
the aforesaid grounds were not duly substantiated before the
competent authority. It is submitted that the petitioner did not
place on record the relevant documents evidencing his alleged
ancestral property at District Jashpur or the medical documents in
support of his ailment and the requirement of treatment. It is,
therefore, submitted that the impugned order does not call for
interference at this stage.
4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of
the material available on record, this Court is of the considered
view that the grounds sought to be urged by the petitioner,
particularly with regard to his medical condition, his alleged
requirement of funds for treatment and the availability of ancestral
property at Village Gaarighat, District Jashpur, are relevant
considerations which ought to be examined by the competent
authority while considering the petitioner's application seeking

4
permission under Section 165(6)(ii) of the Chhattisgarh Land
Revenue Code, 1959. It appears that the aforesaid aspects have
not been considered in their proper perspective by the competent
authority, particularly in the absence of supporting documents
having been placed for its consideration.
5. In the circumstances, without expressing any opinion on the
merits of the petitioner's claim for grant of permission for sale of
the subject land, this Court is of the view that the matter deserves
to be reconsidered by the competent authority upon consideration
of all the relevant facts and materials which may be placed by the
petitioner in support of his claim. Accordingly, the impugned order
dated 30.07.2026 (Annexure P-14) passed by respondent No.2 in
Revenue Case No. 202605061100012/A-21/2025-26 is hereby set
aside and the matter is remanded back to the concerned
Collector, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa for fresh adjudication in
accordance with law.
6. The petitioner shall be at liberty to submit a fresh/revised
application before the concerned Collector within a period of 15
days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Along with such application, the petitioner shall be entitled to
place on record all relevant documents and materials which he
seeks to rely upon, including documents relating to the alleged
ancestral property situated at Village Gaarighat, District Jashpur,
as well as medical records and other documents evidencing his

5
medical condition, treatment and the financial requirement
asserted by him.
7. Upon receipt of such application, the concerned Collector Janjgir,
District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) shall consider the same afresh,
independently and strictly in accordance with the provisions of law
governing the subject matter. The petitioner shall be afforded due
and reasonable opportunity of hearing and shall also be permitted
to place such further documents and submissions on record as
may be necessary for proper adjudication of his claim. Thereafter,
the concerned Collector shall pass a fresh, reasoned and
speaking order, dealing with all the relevant contentions raised by
the petitioner, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date
of receipt of the fresh application.
8. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on
the merits of the petitioner's claim, including his entitlement to
obtain permission for sale of the subject land. The competent
authority shall, therefore, examine and decide the matter
uninfluenced by any observation contained in the present order
and strictly in accordance with the applicable statutory provisions
and the material placed before it.
9. It is further clarified that the setting aside of the impugned order
and remand of the matter shall not be construed as a direction to
the competent authority to grant permission for sale. The question
as to whether such permission is liable to be granted or refused

6
shall be determined by the concerned Collector upon fresh
consideration of the petitioner's application and the material
available on record, by a duly reasoned and speaking order.
10. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is
allowed to the aforesaid extent . The impugned order dated
30.07.2026 (Annexure P-14) is set aside and the matter is
remanded to the concerned Collector for fresh adjudication in
accordance with law.
11. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Yogesh