Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 9131
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Satish Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPC No. 3250 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Sunil Sahu
For the Respondents: Mr. Anurag Tripathi, P.L.
The court affirms that disputes of a civil nature must utilize available alternative remedies before judicial proceedings.
Headnote:The petitioner challenges the legality of a suspension order dated 04.11.2024 upheld by the Upper Collector, arguing the inaction of respondents regarding pending proceedings under Section 250 of CGLRC. The Court identifies the dispute as civil in nature with an alternative remedy available to the petitioner. Final decision: the writ petition is disposed of, allowing the petitioner to file a civil suit.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. relief sought and allegations of interference. (Para 2) |
| 2. challenge to suspension order on administrative grounds. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court finds alternative remedy and civil nature. (Para 5 , 6) |
Order on Board
27/06/2025
1. Counsel for the Petitioner prays for the following relief(s):-
“(I) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding and directing the respondents authority to produce all relevant records for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.
(ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ restraining the respondents in demolishing / removing of the fencing from petitioner land forcefully.
(iii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Tahsildar Keshkal to decide the proceedings pending before him since 23.02.2023 under Section
250 of CGLRC.
(iv) That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ commanding and directed the respondents not to disturb the possession of petitioner till the order of competent authority.
(v) Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on the part of the respondents specially on the part of the respondent No. 3 & 4 who have issued the notice to the petitioner on the application of the respondent No. 5 for permitting her to construct the boundary wall though the proceeding of encroachment is pending in the court of Tahsildar, no final order has been passed till the date and the respondent No. 5 is forcefully interfering in the peaceful possession of the petitioner.
3. the petitioner is challenging an illegal and unsustainable suspension order dated 04.11.2024 and the same has been upheld by the Upper Collector Raipur on 20.12.2024 in Appeal Case No. 01/Year 2024- 25 whereby the learned Upper Collector Raipur upheld the suspension order dated 04.11.2024 issued by the Sub-Divisional OfÏcer (R ) Tilda-Neora, in respect to the functioning of Fair price shop by the petitioner at Nagar Panchayat Kharora, without considering the legal grounds and only on the basis of vague and erroneous inquiry report of the concerned Food Inspector and functioning of the fair price shop has been suspended. Therefore, it is liable to be quashed.
4. Learned counsel for respondents that with regard to the grievance of the petitioner, there is an alternative remedy is available to petitioner to file civil suit before the appropriate forum.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. Considering the submission of the State Counsel and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that it is purely a dispute of civil nature between the petitioner and the respondent No. 5 and there is an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner, therefore I am inclined to entertain this petition. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with liberty to file civil suit before the competent Court, if he so wants.
