Mandamus issued directing Collector to decide pending application for land sale permission within sixty days.

The petitioner, a recorded pattadar of Government land (Khasra No. 161, Village Jevra, Bemetara), sought to sell her land due to extreme financial distress and mounting debts incurred from the medical treatment of her deceased son.

On 09.03.2026, she submitted an application to the Collector, Bemetara (Respondent No. 2), seeking mandatory permission for the sale/transfer of leased land under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959.

Despite a previous direction by the High Court in a related matter (WPC No. 1592/2024), the Collector failed to decide on the application.

The petitioner approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the authority to act upon the pending application.

1. Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued to direct the respondent authority to decide upon a pending application for permission to sale land within a stipulated timeframe?

Sections 165(6)(a), 165(6)(b), and 165(6)(c) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, which regulate the sale or transfer of specific categories of land to protect the interests of the landholders and the State.

Administrative law principle that competent authorities are duty-bound to dispose of statutory applications within a reasonable time and in accordance with the principles of natural justice.

The Court noted that the petitioner was not assailing a specific order but was aggrieved by administrative "inaction".

Since the application was purely administrative in nature, the learned State counsel conceded that it required expeditious consideration.

The Court avoided delving into the merits of the petitioner's financial claims or her right to sell the land; instead, it focused on the procedural lapse of the Collector in keeping the application pending.

The Court's reasoning was grounded in the necessity of a "fair and transparent" process, emphasizing that a reasoned and speaking order must be passed after providing the petitioner with an opportunity to be heard and considering all relevant documents.

The Court disposed of the writ petition without a cost order, directing the Collector, Bemetara, to decide the petitioner’s application under Section 165(6) of the Code strictly in accordance with the law.