← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2244/2017disposed off

Paduman Singh Chandel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-08-29Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2244 of 2017 Paduman Singh Chandel S/o Late Shri Bhukhan Singh Aged about 85 years R/o Ward No. 20, Beside Gagan Apartment, Dipupaara, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department of Revenue (Excise), Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Distict Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur, (Chhattisgarh).

3. Tehsildar, O/o Tahsildar Bilsapur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Inspector- In- Charge, Police Station Taarbahaar, Bilsapur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

5. Pramil Sharma, Manager, Encroachment Department, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

6. Santosh Verma, Assistant, Encroachment Department, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

7. Jaggu Kishore Singh, Tracer, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sumit Singh, Advocate.

For Respondent No.02 : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondents/ State : Mr. Arun Sao, Dy.A.G.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 29/08/17 Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's boundary wall and house has unauthorizedly been demolished by the neighbours of the petitioner and other local miscreants without any authority

of law and they also misbehaved with him for which he is entitled for compensation. The petitioner has also preferred representation to the respondent authorities for the redressal of his grievances but it has not been considered till date. Hence, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition. 2.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is accordingly allowed.

4.

Be that as it may, the Municipal Corporation is directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation expeditiously preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 5.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka