High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/420/2020disposed off

Radheshyam Jaisawal v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2020-01-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 420 of 2020 Radheshyam Jaisawal S/o Shri Dhaniram Jaisawal Aged About 50 Years R/o Lavan, Block Balouda-Bazar, Tahsil Baloudabazar, District Balouda Bazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Collectorate, District Balouda Bazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

2. Sub Divisional Magistrate Baloudabazar, District Balouda BazarBhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

3. Tahsildar Tahsil Baloudabazar, District Balouda Bazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

4. Naib Tahsildar Up-Tahsil Lavan, District Balouda Bazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

5. Nagar Panchayat Lavan Tahsil Baloudabazar, District Balouda Bazar-Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh. Through Chief Executive Officer ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Suryakant Mishra, Advocate For State :

Mr. P. Acharya, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 29/01/2020

1. The challenge in the present writ petition is the warrant of eviction issued by the Nayab Tahsildar dated 22/23.01.2020, so also the fresh notice issued on 27.01.2020.

2. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents on instructions submits that the case of the petitioner is already pending consideration before the Court of the Nayab Tehsildar, wherein the proceedings under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code has been initiated and that till the finalization of the said proceedings, the petitioner whould not be forcefully evicted. The State counsel further submits that from the pleadings itself, it is

evidently clear that the petitioner themselves had entered appearance before the Nayab Tahsildar and has filed a detailed reply also and further that the matter is fixed for the evidence of the parties before the Nayab Tahsildar.

3. Given the said submission by the State counsel, this Court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be decided in this case at this juncture. The writ petition therefore stands disposed of holding that the respondents would not take any action of eviction against the petitioner till the finalization of his case before the Nayab Tehsildar which is pending consideration.

4. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved