[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Faijane Gausulwara Committee, ... vs Collector Ambikapur on 30 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:14843
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WP227 No. 331 of 2026
1 - Faijane Gausulwara Committee, Navagarh Through its President Rahmat Khan,
So- Md. Shakir Ali Aged About 66 Years R/o- Ambikapur, Navagarh, Tehshil
Ambikapur, Dist Sarguja, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
versus
1 - Collector Ambikapur Dist. Sarguja Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
(Cause title taken from Case Information System)
For Petitioner : Mr. Waquar Naiyer, Advocate.
For State : Ms. Isha Jajodiya, Panel Lawyer.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J.
Order on Board
30-03-2026
1. Heard.
2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner against the impugned
order dated 08-01-2026 passed by the Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue, Bilaspur in
Case No.RH/16/R/A68/02/2026 whereby the application filed by the petitioner under
Section 52 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 has been rejected.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner committee
constructed a mosque over the land of khasra No.179/2 area 0.072 hectare (18
dismil) situated at Village Navagarh, P.H. No.3, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja.
However, a complaint was made by one ward member at Ambikapur that on the
basis of forged order allegedly passed by the Tahsildar Ambikapur dated 26-11-
2015 the subject land was mutated in the name of the petitioner committee,
however, it was a government land and it was encroached by them. Learned
counsel for the petitioner would also submit that after obtaining due permission from
the concerned department, the mosque has been constructed since 2022 and till
completion of its construction nobody raised any objection. Now, the said authorities
on the behest of the said ward member trying to dispossess the petitioner from the
subject land by demolishing their construction for which notice has been issued on
25-03-2026 asking the petitioner to show cause why he should not be dispossessed
from the subject land. He would further submit that his revision is pending before the
learned Board of Revenue and till decision of his revision before the learned Board
of Revenue, he may be protected by an interim order.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/State opposes the
submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that on enquiry
conducted by the Collector Ambikapur, the order dated 26-11-2015 produced by the
petitioner has been found forged which is the basis of mutation of land in their
favour. When the possession of the petitioner itself is based on forged order, his
possession cannot be protected. The revenue authorities issued notice to the
petitioner to show cause in which he has not shown any sufficient and legal
document with respect to his possession and their encroachment is on the
government land, which is required to be vacated from illegal possession of the
petitioner and therefore, the petitioner who is in illegal possession of the
government land cannot be protected.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material
annexed with the petition.
6. From perusal of the documents, it transpires that initially the proceeding was
initiated by Tahsildar Ambikapur on the basis of memo dated 04-11-2024 issued by
the Collector with respect to the forged order dated 26-11-2015 and removal of
illegal encroachment from the subject land. The Tahsildar passed the order dated
28-11-2024 after hearing the petitioner by holding that the order dated 26-11-2015,
on the basis of which the mutation of the name of the petitioner was done in the
revenue record, is forged order allegedly passed by Board of Revenue and the
Tahsildar has passed the order for removal of encroachment from the subject land.
The appeal filed by the petitioner before before the SDO (Revenue) Ambikapur has
been dismissed by the detailed order dated 07-01-2025 and the second appeal filed
by the petitioner before the Commissioner, Surguja Division, Ambikapur has also
been dismissed vide order dated 15-05-2025. The petitioner has preferred a
revision before the Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue Bilaspur in which the impugned
order dated 08-01-2026 has been passed. However, the petitioner could not dispute
that the order dated 26-11-2015 on the basis of which their mutation was done in
the revenue record is forged one, however, he is claiming that after obtaining
permission from the various department the mosque has been constructed over the
subject land in the year 2022. The revision is pending for its consideration before
the learned Revenue Board and the application for grant of interim relief has been
rejected.
7. Be that as it may, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would be
served if the Board of Revenue is directed to decide the revision filed by the
petitioner within a reasonable time and till then status quo shall be maintained by
the parties.
8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the
Board of Revenue Bilaspur to decide case No.RH/16/R/A68/02/2026 (mentioned in
Annexure-P/1) pending before it filed by the petitioner within two months from today
in accordance with law after hearing the parties concerned on its own merits. Till the
decision of the Board of Revenue the parties shall maintain status quo with respect
to the subject construction of the petitioner over the subject land.
9. With the aforesaid observations/directions the present writ petition is
disposed of.
10. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to C.G. Board of Revenue, Bilaspur,
for information and necessary compliance.
Sd/-
(Ravindra Kumar Agrawal)
Judge
Aadil
