Shobharam Yadav v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 467 of 2020 Shobharam Yadav S/o Ramesh Yadav Aged About 38 Years R/o Village And Post Bartori, Tehsil Bilha, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue , New Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan , New Raipur Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ----Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Anju Ahuja, Adv.

For State : Shri Ishan Verma, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 03.02.2020

1. The default pointed out by the Registry as of now stands ignored.

2. The limited relief sought for in the present writ petition is for an appropriate direction to the respondent No 2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner in respect of land which has been alloted to the petitioner under Prime Minister Aawas (Gramin) Yojna at Bilha.

3. The contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was earlier living at village Bartori in a government land, after constructing a small hut over the said land. Subsequently, the petitioner was held to be an encroacher, he was removed from the said land. Later, considering the fact that the petitioner was landless and homeless, the petitioner applied for allotment of a land under Prime Minster Aawas (Gramin) Yojna. The collector has thereafter issued an order for allotting a land under village Bilha measuring 30X30 sq. ft.

-24. The grievance of the petitioner is that when the petitioner went to take possession over the said property and wanted to construct a house it has been objected by a third person claiming the said land alloted to him.

5. The only relief at this juncture that the petitioner seeks from this Court is for an appropriate direction to the respondents No. 2 to resolve the dispute by passing an order holing the said 30X30 sq. ft. land alloted to the petitioner is exclusively that of the petitioner and it is not interfered with any third person or in the alternative the petitioner may be given a different portion of land which is totally undisputed.

6. To the limited relief that the petitioner seeks, the State counsel does not have any objection.

7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to consider the grievance of the petitioner at the earliest by passing an appropriate order preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

8. The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha