No coercive action permitted against eviction pending disposal of stay application by statutory appellate authority.

The petitioner claims to have been in settled possession of Government Nazul land (Survey No. 494/1) in Ambikapur for over 30 years, where he operates a shop and resides

Following a complaint by Respondent No. 5 regarding illegal construction, the Tehsildar (Nazul) conducted an inspection and found an encroachment of 409.975 sq. mtrs. plus an additional 87.07 sq. mtrs.

Consequently, the Tehsildar issued an eviction order on 28.01.2026, which was followed by a final eviction order dated 19.03.2026 (the impugned order) after the High Court directed compliance in a previous writ petition

The petitioner challenged this order by filing a statutory appeal and a stay application before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) on 27.03.2026, which are currently pending

Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim protection against dispossession pending the consideration of his statutory appeal and stay application by the Appellate Authority

Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, which provides the right to appeal against the orders of revenue officers

Section 52 of the same Code, which grants the Appellate Authority the power to stay the execution of an order pending the disposal of an appeal

The Court noted that the petitioner had already invoked his statutory remedy under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code by filing an appeal and a stay application before the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue)

Rather than adjudicating the merits of the eviction—which was already subject to the pending appeal—the Court determined that the petitioner should be relegated to the forum already chosen

To ensure that the petitioner's statutory right to appeal is not rendered nugatory by immediate eviction, the Court found it necessary to provide temporary protection

It emphasized that the Appellate Authority must consider the stay application expeditiously to balance the state's interest in removing encroachments with the petitioner’s right to a fair hearing

The Court granted interim relief by ordering that no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner regarding the property in question until the stay application is decided

The State counsel was further directed to communicate this order to the Tehsildar (Nazul) for compliance