Pending patta applications must be independently decided despite concurrent findings of government-land encroachment.

The petitioner challenged the eviction notice dated 24.05.2024 issued by the Nayab Tahsildar under which he was directed to remove a structure allegedly situated on Government land bearing Khasra No. 141, measuring 3.36 hectares, with the alleged encroachment measuring 7.70 × 7.30 metres.

He disputed the encroachment, the identification and measurement of the land, and the legality of the demarcation conducted by the revenue authorities.

The Tahsildar had earlier imposed a penalty of ₹1,000 and ordered eviction on 25.04.2022 under Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code.

The petitioner’s revision before the Collector was dismissed on 08.06.2023, and his further revision before the Board of Revenue was dismissed, as recorded in the judgment, on 13.02.2024.

The petitioner had also filed an application dated 27.02.2023 before the Collector seeking allotment/grant of patta over the disputed land, which remained pending.

Whether the High Court should interfere with the concurrent findings of the Tahsildar, Collector and Board of Revenue that the petitioner had encroached upon Government land?

Whether the Collector should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s pending application dated 27.02.2023 for allotment/grant of patta?

The Court applied Section 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, under which the revenue authorities may proceed against unauthorised occupation or encroachment upon Government land.

It also applied the principle that a writ court will not ordinarily interfere with concurrent factual findings of the competent revenue authorities unless a substantial legal or jurisdictional error is established.

Separately, where an application for allotment or settlement of Government land is pending, the competent authority must consider it independently and pass a reasoned order in accordance with the applicable law, rules and Government policy, without any presumption that the applicant is entitled to allotment.

The Court noted that the Tahsildar, Collector and Board of Revenue had concurrently found the petitioner to be an encroacher on Government land.

Although the petitioner challenged the demarcation, identification of the Khasra number and the manner in which the proceedings were conducted, the Court found no sufficient ground warranting interference with those findings in writ jurisdiction.

However, the petitioner’s separate application dated 27.02.2023 for allotment/grant of patta was undisputedly pending before the Collector.

The Court therefore treated the pending application as requiring an independent administrative determination, without expressing any view on the petitioner’s entitlement or undermining the existing findings regarding encroachment.

The Collector was directed to examine the application independently and deal with it according to law if the petitioner satisfied the requisite criteria.

The Court expressly clarified that it had not adjudicated the petitioner’s entitlement to allotment, grant of patta or settlement of the land.