##PAGE1##

CGHC010395432026 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally signed by PRIYANKA PRIYANKAVERMA VERMA Date:

2 1 0 8 2 :3 6 9 .1 :1 0 3 .16 WPC No. 5125 of 2026 +0530 KESHAV SONKAR versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Order Sheet

16/10/2026 Mr. Shikhar Sharma, counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Deputy GA for the State.

Heard.

Issue notice to the respondents.

Since learned State counsel accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 4, on an advance copy, issuance of notice to the said respondents stands dispensed with.

Issue notice to respondent No. 5 to 8 only on payment of P.F. by ordinary as well as speed post.

Also heard on I.A. No.01/2026, an application for grant of interim relief/stay.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the purchaser of the property and has purchased the same from a non-tribal person belonging to the Ganda community. However, the allegation is that the petitioner purchased the property from a tribal person by wrongly representing him as a non-tribal person, and on this basis, the impugned order has been passed, which is not in accordance with law.

Learned State counsel submits that he has taken instructions from the concerned SDO, according to which the seller-Nokhe Lal belongs to the Nagarchi community, a Scheduled Tribe listed at serial No. 16, being a sub-caste of the Gond Scheduled Tribe. He further submits that the SDO has rightly passed the impugned order, as the aforesaid persons have executed an affidavit before the Notary Public, Gariyaband, stating that they belong to the Nagarchi Scheduled Tribe.

Upon this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has the relevant documents, including the Misal Bandobast, according to which the seller belongs to the Ganda caste, which is a non-tribal community. He, therefore, submits that the impugned order is not sustainable.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, purely as an interim measure, the effect and operation of the order dated 14.08.2026 is hereby stayed till the next date of hearing.

The petitioner is directed to file an affidavit explaining the delay in filing the petition as well as the remedy available to the petitioner. Learned State counsel is directed to file reply along with the relevant documents, copies of which have been passed over to this Court for ready reference.

List this matter in the month of December, 2026.

Sd/-

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

Judge

Priyanka