THANU SATNAMI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

Aggrieved by the notice dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure â€" P/1) issued by respondent No. 4 - Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil, Nawagarh, whereby the

petitioners have been directed to remove the encroachment made over the government land.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioners are residing on the said place since many decades and the impugned

notice has been passed without providing any alternative accommodation to the petitioners which is unsustainable and bad in law and, therefore, the

impugned notice is liable to be set aside.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents points out that pursuant to the order of Revenue Officer under Section 248 of the Land Revenue

Code dated 20.02.2015, the notice for removing the encroachment has been issued to the petitioners which has been challenged in the writ petition

whereas it is appealable before the Appellate Authority.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders with utmost circumspection.

Since, the petitioners have been held to be encroachers on the government land but looking to the fact that they are staying in the said premises for

a fairly long time, therefore, their case for rehabilitation requires consideration. The Collector, Bemetara and Naib Tahsildar, Tahsil, Nawagarh are

directed to look into and decide the petitioners' representation for rehabilitation in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of 45

days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).