Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 10549
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Arvind Kumar Verma, J
Prem Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State Of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
WPC No. 4906 of 2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. AN Pandey
For the Respondent-State: Mr. Anurag Tripathi, PL
The court reinforced procedural integrity in granting land rights, asserting that long-term occupants should be protected from dispossession pending lawful claims.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Petition seeks direction to consider an application for grant of Van Adhikar Patta and to restrain dispossession of petitioner from land - Petitioner claims possession for 50-55 years; government policy supports their claim for patta - Petition disposed with directions. (Paras 1, 5, 6)
(B) Land Law - Rights of Forest Dwellers - The petitioner is asserting rights under specific legislation, having constructed a house and cultivated the land for several decades, and has approached the court due to threats of dispossession without due process. (Paras 2, 5)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner asserts long-term possession and investment in land for agriculture, with pending application for patta which authorities are yet to decide. Notices issued threaten dispossession.
Findings of Court:
Petition granted; authorities ordered to decide on the application within stipulated timelines and not to take coercive actions.
Issues: Whether the petitioner has rights to the land based on possession and application for patta; procedural fairness in handling the application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasizes the importance of respecting applications for land rights and procedural integrity of the authorities, mandating timely decisions without threats of dispossession.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition addresses land rights claims based on long possession. (Para 2) |
| 2. discussion on procedural responses from state authorities. (Para 3) |
| 3. court's focus on timely decision-making for pending applications. (Para 4) |
| 4. court prohibits dispossession until due process and decision on claims. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 5. final ruling emphasized procedural compliance and urgency. (Para 7) |
Order on Board
15.09.2025
1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:
“10. RELIEF(S) SOUGHT:
10.1 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the application for grant of Van Adhikar Patta of the subject land bearing compartment по. 424 rakba 3.90 acre situated at village - Daldhowa Tahsil- Balrampur, Distt- Balrampur - Ramnujgnaj (C.G) within stipulated period
10.2 That, this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities to not dispossessed the petitioner from the subject land and house till the final decision of the application for grant of Van Adhikar Patta of the subject land of petitioner
10.3 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is in possession upon the subject land/property (bearing compartment no.P-424 rakba 3.90 acre situated at village - Daldhowa, Tahsil- Balrampur, Distt- Balrampur -Ramnujgnaj (C.G)
since the last 50-55 years. Father of petitioner has constructed the residential house on some portion of the subject land/property, petitioner alongwith his family are residing on the rest of land, they are cultivating on the said land regularly and invested the large amount to prepare the land for agriculture purposes and under the scheme of Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna, house was sanctioned in the name of petitioner and constructed the house upon the said land. Learned Counsel further contended that Gram Panchayat - Maheshpur issued the panchnama regarding possession of the petitioner upon the subject house and land since last 55 years and as per policy of issued by the Govt. under the Schedule Tribes and other Prampragat Van Niwasi (Reorganization of Forest Right Adhiniyam 2006) petitioner is eligible for grant of patta and the petitioner has made an application for grant of patta of the subject land before respondent no.3, which is still pending for consideration. Learned Counsel also contended that respondent no.8 issued notice to the petitioner on 13.6.2025 and directed to submit the entire documents regarding the land otherwise, Authority will remove the petitioner from the subject land. After notice, petitioner submitted the details alongwith reply, but the forest authorities have not consider the reply filed by the petitioner and directed him to vacate the possession from the subject land and restrain the petitioner to cultivate of land and treated the petitioner as encroacher of the subject land and trying to dispossess the petitioner from the subject land. If petitioner and his family members have been dispossessed from the subject property then they will suffer irreparable loss. The entire claim of the petitioner is depend on the pending application of petitioner for Grant of Van Adhikar Patta of the subject land, which is still pending before respondent no.3, however, concern authority has already granted the Van Adhikar patta to the similarly situated person in the same village and in the same compartment. Hence, petition has came-up before this Court with aforesaid prayer.
3. Learned State counsel contended that the petitioner may file the fresh representation before the concerned authority and in-turn concerned authority shall consider and decide the same as per law.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection.
5. Considerin
