01Facts
The petitioner, a resident of Village Akalwara, claimed lawful possession of residential land based on an initial allotment of 750 sq. meters in 2002 and subsequent allotments under the Mukhyamantri Aabadi Patta Scheme in 2018 (Khasra Nos. 565 and 566)
¶ 2The respondent authorities (specifically the Tahsildar and Gram Panchayat) alleged that the petitioner had encroached upon Government land (Khasra No. 567) and demolished the petitioner's pucca house on December 10, 2025
¶ 1-2The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a mandamus to prevent interference with his lawful possession and claiming compensation, asserting that the demolition occurred without proper demarcation or due process
¶ 3-402Issues
i.1. Whether the respondent authorities' actions in demolishing the petitioner's property were arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice
¶ 4ii.2. Whether proper demarcation of the land is required to distinguish between the petitioner's allotted land and the alleged encroached Government land prior to eviction proceedings
¶ 703Law Applied
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, which governs the identification, demarcation, and removal of encroachments from Government land
¶ 5Principles of Natural Justice, emphasizing that administrative action involving the deprivation of property must follow due process, including the right to a fair hearing and conclusive determination of facts (such as boundaries) in the presence of affected parties
¶ 1, 7Provisions in the judgment · 1
Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 Section 248
04Reasoning
The Court observed that the crux of the dispute was a factual controversy regarding the exact measurement and demarcation of the petitioner’s allotted land versus the alleged encroached area
¶ 7It noted that the respondent authorities had initiated proceedings, but the demarcation had not been conclusively determined in the presence of all concerned parties
¶ 7The Court reasoned that since the petitioner held valid pattas (land titles), his possession of the allotted land could not be disturbed except by following the procedure established by law
¶ 9To resolve the conflict fairly, the Court determined that the matter must be relegated to the competent revenue authority (Tahsildar) to conduct a fresh, transparent measurement to identify any actual excess occupation
¶ 7-805Holding
The Court disposed of the writ petition by directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the Tahsildar within two weeks
¶ 8The Tahsildar was ordered to conduct an official demarcation in the presence of the petitioner and other parties and pass a reasoned order within three months
¶ 8-9The Court held that the land covered by the petitioner's valid patta shall not be disturbed; however, if demarcation reveals occupation of excess land, the petitioner must vacate it, and the authorities may proceed according to law
¶ 9No order as to costs was made
¶ 12Original Court PDF
DEVNARAYAN SAHUvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
