High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/4341/2021disposed off

Pukram Ghritlahare v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2021-10-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant2 pages

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 4341 of 2021

1. Pukram Ghritlahare, S/o Late Shri Jidhan Ghritlahare, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Village Godadih, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

2. Badrika Bai Ghritlahare, W/o Shri Pukram Ghritlahre, Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Godadih, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

3. The Sub Divisional Officer Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

4. The Tahsildar Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

5. The Naib Tahsildar Masturi, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

6. The In Charge Officer Land Records Department, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh., District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Keshav Dewangan, Advocate.

For State : Ms. Sameeksha Gupta, PL.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant Order On Board 29/10/2021 Heard.

1. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner No.1

was granted land on lease on 30.12.1985 and petitioner No.2 was granted land on lease on 10.6.1985. The petitioners are in possession of the land granted to them on lease. Both the petitioners moved application before respondent No.4 on 11.6.2021, making a prayer that online entry be made in the revenue records regarding the land alloted to them on lease. The Incharge of land records has issued a memo to the respondent No.4 directing him to take action on the application filed by the petitioners and report the same, but the respondent No.4 has not taken any action so far, therefore, this petition has been filed seeking reliefs as prayed in the petition.

2. Learned State counsel opposes the submissions present in this respect. However, she has not objection if the petition is disposed off with direction.

3. After considering on the submissions, this petition is disposed off. Respondent No.4 is directed to consider on the application filed by the petitioners within a period of 60 days from today and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of.

Sd/- (Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nisha