HARILAL vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPC/1683/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 10th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010139052026

Filing Number

WPC/8031/2026

Filing Date

06-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPC/1683/2026

Registration Date

08-Apr-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )

Sub-Category

MATTERS RELATING TO ENCROACHMENTS ON GOVERNMENT LAND AND DEMOLITION OF BUILDINGS. ( 1708 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 17-May-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HARILAL

    Adv. VIVEK BHAKTA,A.N.BHAKTA,A.N.BHAKTA, ,A.N.BHAKTA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.

  2. 2.The Secretary,

  3. 3.The Collector,

  4. 4.The District Forest Officer,

  5. 5.The Sub Divisional Officer (Forest),

  6. 6.The Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.),

  7. 7.The Forest Range Officer,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed 16 consolidated writ petitions filed by landless persons challenging forest land eviction notices, but stayed coercive action and directed petitioners to approach authorities under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 within 30 days. The court recognized the state's constitutional duty to provide shelter while upholding that encroachment cannot be condoned, ordering procedural compliance through proper legal channels instead of direct court intervention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPC/1683/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed 16 consolidated writ petitions filed by landless persons challenging forest land eviction notices, but stayed coercive action and directed petitioners to approach authorities under the Forest Rights Act, 2006 within 30 days. The court recognized the state's constitutional duty to provide shelter while upholding that encroachment cannot be condoned, ordering procedural compliance through proper legal channels instead of direct court intervention. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case