Smt. Bimala Bai Sonpipare v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No.722 of 2016 • Smt. Bimala Bai Sonpipare, W/o Shri Chamruram Sonpipare, aged about 55 years, R/o Village - Lanjoda, Tahsil-Farasgaon, Revenue District - Kondagaon, & Civil District - Jagdalpur (C.G.) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Civil & Revenue District - Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

2. The Collector, Kondagaon, Revenue District-Kondagaon & Civil District - Jagdalpur (C.G.)

3. The Land Acquisition Officer (The Sub-Divisional Officer), Kondagaon, Revenue District Kondagaon & Civil District Jagdalpur (C.G.)

4. The Tahsildar, Farasgaon, Revenue District Kondagaon & Civil District Jagdalpur (C.G.)

5. The Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Kondagaon, Revenue District Kondagaon & Civil District - Jagdalpur (C.G.)

6. The Station House Officer, Police Station, Kondagaon, Revenue District - Kondagaon & Civil District - Jagdalpur (C.G.)

7. The Sarpanch, Village Panchayat Lanjoda, Tahsil-Farasgaon, Revenue District - Kondagaon & Civil District - Jagdalpur (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Paras Mani Shrivas, Advocate For Respondents :

Shri Rama Kant Mishra, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 21/03/2016 Heard 2.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondent-authorities to enquire into the complaint moved by the petitioner and her husband.

3.

Pleadings of the petitioner are that the petitioner acquired title in respect of land in dispute by virtue of Will executed in her favour by one Smt. Ganeshiya Bai. According to the petitioner, on the basis of that will, the name of the petitioner has also been mutated in the revenue records.

4.

Grievance of the petitioner is that Gram Panchayat Lanjoda has decided to construct community hall in her land. According to the petitioner, the community hall is being constructed on the aforementioned land of the petitioner. 5.

The dispute appears to be factual in nature. Whether or not the community hall is being constructed on the aforesaid land is a matter which requires spot inspection, demarcation, etc.

6.

The appropriate remedy for the petitioner would be to seek demarcation. The petitioner has made a representation to Tahsildar. The Tahsildar (respondent No.4) may get demarcation done in accordance with the provisions of Land Revenue Code. Demarcation should be done within 60 days from the date of representation made by the petitioner. On the basis of the demarcation, report of the demarcation shall be communicated both to the petitioner and concerned Gram Panchayat. Thereafter, if any party is aggrieved, it may take recourse to appropriate remedy available to them under the law. 7.

With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Anjani