Tilotma Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the husband of the petitioner late Shri Ramo Yadav was granted lease of land bearing khasra

No. 956/2 admeasuring 0.010 hect i.e. 1089 sq. ft. at village Sariya vide Annexure P-2 by the Gram Panchayat, Sariya on 29.08.2001. Subsequently,

the Gram Panchayat, Sariya was upgraded as Nagar Panchayat, Sariya. He further submits that after lease was granted construction was made over

the land and tax was paid which would be evident from Annexure P-3. Subsequently, the lessee Ramo Yadav died on 14.01.2011. Thereafter, all of a

sudden the petitioner (wife of late Ramo Yadav) was served with a notice dated 02.06.2020 (Annexure P-1) wherein it was stated that she is

encroacher of the land to the extent 2599 sq. ft. khasra/ plot No. 954/1/A and she was directed to deposit Rs. 11,06,503/- . He would submit that the

petitioner is not encroacher as the husband of the petitioner was granted the lease by the Gram Panchayat as then as it was. Subsequently, Gram

Panchayat was upgraded as Nagar Panchayat and the taxes were also paid. He would submit that on the wrong premises notice dated 02.06.2020

(Annexure P-1) has been issued and as per the policy of the State dated 11.09.2019 she would be covered by Clause 10 to the extent of the land

admeasuring 1089 sq. ft. and as the notice has been issued on wrong premises taking the petitioner as encroacher without adhering to the fact that she

has now become lessee claiming through her late deceased husband.

Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioner has come up directly before this Court and they should have initially deposited the amount

before the Nagar panchayat and thereafter Collector could have decided the issue.

Perused the documents.

Prima facie, perusal of Annexure P-2 would show that the husband of the petitioner was granted lease in respect of the land khasra No. 956/2

admesuring area 33X33 i.e. 1089 sq. ft. Subsequently, Annexure P-3 would show that the taxes have also been paid to the Nagar Panchayat and if

the husband of the petitioner was granted the lease by the Gram Panchayat then in such case certainly the petitioner being the wife of the deceased

lessee would be covered by Clause 10 of the Circular of the State (Annexure P-5).

Clause 10 of the Circular dated 11.09.2019 reads as under:-

Since factual dispute has arose, the petitioner is given liberty to make a fresh application before the Collector, as the Collector appears to be the

competent authority to grant the Bhumi Swami right or lease according to the policy of the State dated 11.09.2019. The petitioner may file the

documents before the Collector, the Collector in turn may get the enquiry done as to whether the petitioner is in occupation of land 1089 sq. ft or 2599

sq. ft, thereafter as per the policy dated 11.09.2019 the Collector would act accordingly. The petitioner shall have the liberty to file necessary

application with relevant documents within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Thereafter, the Collector shall decide the

entitlement of the petitioner how and under which category she would be entitled to the land according to the policy dated 11.09.2019. The

adjudication by the Collector would be done within a further period of 6 months from the date of receipt of the representation. Till the decision by

Collector is arrived the notice dated 02.06.2020 (Annexure P-1) shall be kept in abeyance and shall not be acted upon.

With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ petition stands disposed off.