SMT. SHANTI vs THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — WPC/1636/2026

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

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010139372026

Filing Number

WPC/8058/2026

Filing Date

06-Apr-2026

Registration No

WPC/1636/2026

Registration Date

07-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.SMT. SHANTI

    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

    The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed multiple writ petitions by landless forest dwellers challenging eviction notices from reserved forest land, but stayed coercive action and directed them to file claims under the Forest Rights Act 2006 within 30 days, recognizing the State's welfare duty to provide shelter while upholding forest land protection. The court balanced individual hardship against environmental conservation through legal remedial processes. 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/1636/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed multiple writ petitions by landless forest dwellers challenging eviction notices from reserved forest land, but stayed coercive action and directed them to file claims under the Forest Rights Act 2006 within 30 days, recognizing the State's welfare duty to provide shelter while upholding forest land protection. The court balanced individual hardship against environmental conservation through legal remedial processes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case