1 CGHC010284762026 2026:CGHC:32442 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR RAVVA UTTEJ UTTEJRAJU WPC No. 3844 of 2026 KUMAR RAJU DigitallysignedRAVVAKUMARDate:2026.07.3019:20:40+0530 by 1 - Vinod Jaiswal S/o Kewal Jaiswal Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 2 - Premlal Jaiswal S/o Jay Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 3 - Pawan Kumar Kalar S/o Jay Prasad Kalar Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ghurahu Prasad Kalar S/o Ramratan Kalar Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 5 - Anjani Prasad Jaiswal S/o Basanturam Jaiswal Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 6 - Santosh Kumar Jaiswal S/o Kewal Jaiswal Aged About 50 Years R/o 2 Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 7 - Dudhnath Jaiswal S/o Ramnandan Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2 - The Collector District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Divisional Forest Officer Forest Division - Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Forest Range Officer Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioners : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Advocate. For State : Mr. S.S. Choubey, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. The petitioners have filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- 3 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition and direct the Respondents to produce entire records pertaining to the present case for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to Respondents thereby quash the impugned notices 02.06.2026 dated & 02.06.2026(Annexure P/1). 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an to Respondents by appropriate writ/order/direction directing them not to proceed with the dispossession of petitioners. (iv) That, any other order/relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioners in the ends of justice & equity. v) That, the cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioners.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by notice dated 02.06.2026, whereby they have been directed to appear before the competent authority along with the relevant documents to establish his lawful possession over the land in question, namely Compartment No. P- 653. It is further submitted that, though the impugned communication is couched as a notice, it is, in substance, an order for removal of the alleged encroachment. In support of this contention, learned counsel points out that the latter part of the notice stipulates that, in the event the petitioners fails to appear 4 with the requisite documents, the concerned authorities shall proceed to take necessary action against him. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that the present petition is premature, as the petitioners are required to approach the competent authority and furnish the relevant documents, which have not yet been submitted. It is contended that, for this reason, no action has been taken against the petitioners, notwithstanding the issuance of the removal warrant and other consequential proceedings.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately served by directing the petitioners to approach the competent authority for redressal of the grievance in accordance with law, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned authorities within a period of 10 days from today. Upon such appearance, the concerned authorities shall consider the grievance of the petitioners objectively and pass a reasoned and appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of 30 days thereafter in the interest of justice, and to ensure that the petitioners' grievance is meaningfully considered, it is further directed that no coercive steps shall be 5 taken against the petitioners by the respondents for a period of thirty (30) days from today or until the competent authority passes an order pursuant to these directions, whichever is earlier. 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju

1 CGHC010284762026 2026:CGHC:32442 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR RAVVA UTTEJ UTTEJRAJU WPC No. 3844 of 2026 KUMAR RAJU DigitallysignedRAVVAKUMARDate:2026.07.3019:20:40+0530 by 1 - Vinod Jaiswal S/o Kewal Jaiswal Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 2 - Premlal Jaiswal S/o Jay Prasad Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh 3 - Pawan Kumar Kalar S/o Jay Prasad Kalar Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - Ghurahu Prasad Kalar S/o Ramratan Kalar Aged About 65 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 5 - Anjani Prasad Jaiswal S/o Basanturam Jaiswal Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 6 - Santosh Kumar Jaiswal S/o Kewal Jaiswal Aged About 50 Years R/o 2 Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 7 - Dudhnath Jaiswal S/o Ramnandan Aged About 38 Years R/o Village Girwani, P.S. And Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

2 - The Collector District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Divisional Forest Officer Forest Division - Balrampur, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Forest Range Officer Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur-Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioners : Mr. Sharad Mishra, Advocate. For State : Mr. S.S. Choubey, G.A. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/07/2026 1. The petitioners have filed the instant petition seeking following reliefs:- 3 “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition and direct the Respondents to produce entire records pertaining to the present case for its kind perusal. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to Respondents thereby quash the impugned notices 02.06.2026 dated & 02.06.2026(Annexure P/1). 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an to Respondents by appropriate writ/order/direction directing them not to proceed with the dispossession of petitioners. (iv) That, any other order/relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, proper and just in the facts and circumstances of the present case may also kindly be awarded to the petitioners in the ends of justice & equity. v) That, the cost of the petition may kindly also be awarded to the petitioners.”

2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are aggrieved by notice dated 02.06.2026, whereby they have been directed to appear before the competent authority along with the relevant documents to establish his lawful possession over the land in question, namely Compartment No. P- 653. It is further submitted that, though the impugned communication is couched as a notice, it is, in substance, an order for removal of the alleged encroachment. In support of this contention, learned counsel points out that the latter part of the notice stipulates that, in the event the petitioners fails to appear 4 with the requisite documents, the concerned authorities shall proceed to take necessary action against him. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that the present petition is premature, as the petitioners are required to approach the competent authority and furnish the relevant documents, which have not yet been submitted. It is contended that, for this reason, no action has been taken against the petitioners, notwithstanding the issuance of the removal warrant and other consequential proceedings.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be adequately served by directing the petitioners to approach the competent authority for redressal of the grievance in accordance with law, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned authorities within a period of 10 days from today. Upon such appearance, the concerned authorities shall consider the grievance of the petitioners objectively and pass a reasoned and appropriate order, strictly in accordance with law, within a period of 30 days thereafter in the interest of justice, and to ensure that the petitioners' grievance is meaningfully considered, it is further directed that no coercive steps shall be 5 taken against the petitioners by the respondents for a period of thirty (30) days from today or until the competent authority passes an order pursuant to these directions, whichever is earlier. 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju