YOGESH TIWARI TIWARI Date: 2026.02.12

11:00:31 +0530

2026:CGHC:7472 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7672 of 2023 Rup Singh S/o Shri Nakul Singh Aged About 45 Years Occupation - Service, Presently Posted As Kotwar of Village - Patseoni, Tahsil -

Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.)

... Petitioner versus

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Revenue Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Collector Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Gariyaband, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

4 - Tahsildar, Chhura District Gariyaband (C.G.)

5 - Genddas S/o Mangaldas Aged About 67 Years Ex-Kotwar, R/o Village - Patseoni, P.S. Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.)

... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioner : Mr. Rajendra Patel, Advocate For State/respondents No. 1 : Mr. Ashutosh Shukla, Panel Lawyer to 4 For Resplendent No. 5 : Ms. Renu Kochar, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge

Order on Board

10.02.2026

1. By filing the instant petition, the petitioner assails the impugned order dated 13.09.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Tahsildar, Chhura, District Gariyaband (C.G.) and prays for following relief(s):–

“10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ by quashing the impugned order dated 13.09.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Tahsildar Chhura, District - Gariyaband (C.G.).

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue to work as a Kotwar of Village Patseoni.

10.3 That the respondent's authority may kindly be directed to produce all the records which relates to passing of the impugned order for kind perusal of this Hon'ble court.

10.4 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, at the outset, submits that without availing the alternative statutory remedy available to the petitioner, the present writ petition has been preferred. In view thereof, he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the instant writ petition with liberty to file a duly constituted petition/appeal before the competent authority. He further submits that considerable time has been spent by the petitioner in prosecuting the matter before this Court and, therefore, prays that the competent authority may be directed to take into consideration the period during which the writ petition remained pending before this Court. He also submits that the petitioner is still continuing on the post of Kotwar by virtue of the interim order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.09.2023, and prays that the said interim protection may be continued till the first date of hearing of the proposed petition/appeal before the competent authority.

3. Per contra, learned State counsel fairly submits that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative statutory remedy available under the relevant provisions of law and, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable at this stage. He further submits that appropriate directions may be issued to the appellate authority to decide the petition/appeal within a stipulated time, in accordance with law.

4. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5 supports the submissions advanced by the learned State counsel and contends that the impugned order has been passed strictly in accordance with law and after following due procedure. She submits that respondent No.5 has been validly appointed and is legally entitled to continue on the post in question. However, without prejudice to his rights and contentions, she raises no objection to the withdrawal of the writ petition with liberty to avail the alternative remedy, provided that all issues are left open to be adjudicated by the competent authority.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused