WPC/2262/2012 of Vishnu Dayal Agrawal Vs State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. on 27 December 2012

1. TheStateofChhattisgarh,/ Through Secretary, Department ofRevenue, Mahanadi Bhavan, NayaRaipur, District Raipur (C.G.)./ Through Secretary, Department ofRevenue, Mahanadi Bhavan, NayaRaipur, District Raipur (C.G.).

RESPONDENTS

TheSubDivisionalOfficer(Revenue), District Janjgir-Champa(C.G.).(Revenue), District Janjgir-Champa(C.G.).3.TheMunicipalCouncil,Sakti,ThroughitsChiefMunicipalOfficer, Municipal Council, Sakti,District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).ThroughitsChiefMunicipalOfficer, Municipal Council, Sakti,District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.).

/i/

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THECONSTITUTION OF INDIA

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

W.P.fC)No.2260of2012

W.P.(C) No.2261 of 2012

WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

SB:- HON. SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA. J.

PRESENT :-Shri Ankit Singhal, counsel for the petitioners.Shri Satish Gupta, Government Advocate for the State.

ORAL ORDER(27.12.2012)

1. The present batch of writ pefitions are disposed of by this common order as common questions of facts and law are involved in these writ petitions.

^

2. By way of instant petitions, petitioners seek to challengenotice dated 07.12.2012 directing each of the petitioner to remove jiencroachment, failing which, the authorities ofthe Municipal Council,Sakti shall proceed to remove the encroachment.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that none ofTtthe petitioners has encroached any part of Government land or landin control of Municipal Council and that concerned Municipal Councilismost likely toremove them frompossessionof their ownland/building.

4. The question as to whether the land occupied by the petitionersbelongs to them or is a part of Government land is a disputed question[of]fact, which cannot be gone into in this batch of writ petitions. However, at^the same time, it is also to be seen that if the petitioners are in possessionof the land/building, which belongs to them, they are entitled to beprotected in law.Therefore, the present batch of writ petitions aredisposed of in following manner:

i.The respondents, more particularly, respondents No.2 &3 shall demarcate the land in possession of the petitioners intheir presence and shall thereafter decide the exact area of landencroached by the petitioners within a period of 15 days from thedate of receipt of a copy of this order.

%

ii.If the petitioners are found to be in possession of anypart of Government land/Municipal land, the respondents shall.^.be entitled to remove the encroachment.However,if the petitionershavenotencroachedanypartof Governmentland/Municipal land but the said Municipal Council still needs thearea of land for construction of a road/drain or for any lawfulobject, as contemplated under the Chhattisgarh MunicipalitiesAct, 1961 (for short 'the Act of i961'), they will be entitled toregulate line of building, in terms of Section 184 of the Act of1961.

iii.Till the demarcation is made and the petitioners aremade aware of the area of land encroached by them, thepetitioners shall not be dispossessed from the land in theiroccupation.The entire exercise shall be completed by theconcerned respondents within a period of 6 weeks from today.iv.Similar view has been taken by this Court in its orderdated 11.06.2012 in W.P.(C) No.937 of 2012 (Devendra KumarTiwari v-State of Chhattisgarh and others).

-

5. With the above direction, the writ petition stand disposed of.

6. Consequently, applications for urgent hearing and for hearingthe case during winter holidays all stand disposed of.

Sd/- Kumar MishraprashantJudge