Collector directed to decide representation for alternative land or compensation following encroachment on private property.

The petitioner is the recorded owner of land bearing Khasra No. 178/1 (2.90 acres) in Village Banahil, purchased via a registered sale deed dated 02.06.2011

During her absence, villagers and the Gram Panchayat encroached upon the land, constructing a graveyard, a concrete road, and installing a water hand pump

The Tahsildar (Respondent No. 4) rejected the petitioner’s claim on 08.01.2026, stating that the removal of such public structures and the handover of possession fell outside the jurisdiction of the revenue court

The petitioner has filed multiple representations before the Collector (Respondent No. 2) since 2016, requesting alternative land or compensation, the most recent being dated 29.04.2025, which remains pending

The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a direction for the disposal of this pending representation

Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the Collector to decide the petitioner's pending representation for alternative land or compensation in light of the encroachment on her private property for public purposes

The Court exercised its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which empowers High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of legal rights

It applied the principle of administrative accountability, requiring statutory authorities (specifically the Collector under relevant land revenue and administrative frameworks) to decide pending representations and claims submitted by citizens in a time-bound and lawful manner

The Court noted that the petitioner sought relief because her private land had been effectively converted to public use (graveyard and road), making physical restoration difficult as per the Tahsildar’s order

Counsel for the petitioner limited the prayer to a request for a time-bound direction to the Collector to decide the pending application dated 29.04.2025

The State did not oppose this limited prayer, acknowledging that the Collector is the appropriate authority to decide such matters in accordance with law

The Court, without adjudicating on the merits of the property dispute or the validity of the encroachment claims, determined that the interests of justice would be served by ensuring the administrative authority performs its duty to finalize the pending representation

It directed Respondent No. 2 (The Collector, District Janjgir-Champa) to decide the petitioner’s representation dated 29.04.2025 expeditiously, preferably within 60 days from the date of submission of the court order

No costs were ordered