Asit Kumar Sarkar vs State Of Chhattisgarh

The present writ petition has been filed alleging the action on the part of the respondents threatening the petitioner of being evicted from the shop

which is in his possession for last more than 30 years.

According to the petitioner, he was running an Iron and Cement shop for more than 30 years at a government land situated at Khasra No.586/1

area roughly 6000 sq. ft. at PH No.60 (New Number 29) Village Baanbarad, Tehsil Dhamdha, District Durg.

The counsel for the petitioner submits that he has already moved an appropriate application before the revenue authorities for allotment of the said

land in terms of the policy of the State Govt. dated 11.09.2019 which is particularly dealing with the allotment of land to people who get displaced in

the course of removal of encroachment. The petitioner submits that he has not been able to get a favorable order from the office of the Tehsildar and

subsequently has also failed before the office of the SDO on this aspect and the appeal thereafter which has been preferred by the petitioner is

pending before the Divisional Commissioner, Durg and the Commissioner is seized of the the matter and has fixed the case for 10.02.2022. However,

meanwhile, the respondents have threatened the petitioner of demolishing the said property.

The matter was taken up on mention today. Today when the matter is taken up, the respondents counsel submits that he has instructions to state

that the demolition part of the structure has already been done. The State counsel further submits that it was a case where the petitioner was illegally

occupying the government land and which was right within the premises of the office of the Tehsildar, Dhamdha itself. Therefore, there was a need

for removal of the said encroachment and an appropriate action was initiated.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by virtue of the demolition of the said construction the petitioner would be loosing his source of

livelihood and not alone the petitioner, but his entire family and other dependants would be adversely affected, so also the employees engaged by him

would also be adversely affected. Therefore, let the respondent authorities may still take an appropriate decision on the claim of the petitioner for an

alternative suitable land so that the petitioner can be rehabilitated, resettled and can restart his business at a different location which otherwise comes

to a standstill because of the demolition of the shop.

To this submission, the counsel for the State submits that let the petitioner make an appropriate application in this regard supported with all suitable

requirement and formalities, the district authorities in turn would definitely consider the same on its own merits in accordance with law.

The counsel for the petitioner further raises an apprehension that since his claim for allotment of land in terms of Annexure P/2 has already been

rejected by the Tehsildar and the SDO, the respondents should not prejudicially decide his application or should not reject his claim for the reason of it

having got rejected in the past.

It goes without saying that the earlier application till now pressed by the petitioner was for the land over which his shop was situated, now that

demolition work has already been complete, the petitioner would have a fresh claim for seeking for an alternative land in terms of Annexure P/2 to be

considered by the District Collector. Rejection of his applications in the past or pendency of his appeal before the Divisional Commissioner would not

come in the way of the District Collector in considering the claim of the petitioner afresh suitably and sympathetically in accordance with law after

due verification and scrutiny of the claim and the entitlement part. In the event if such an application is made by the petitioner, the District Collector

i.e. respondent No.3 or the officer concerned, as the case may be, shall finalize the entire proceedings within an outer limit of 90 days.

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