High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/3518/2017disposed off

Anil Kumar Gupta v. The State Of Chhattisgarh

2018-01-03Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No.3518 of 2017

1. Anil Kumar Gupta Son Of Changulal Gupta, Aged About 52 Years (Wrongly Mention As Chhanulal), R/o Vivekanand Chowk, Main Road, Dondilohara, Ward No. 7, Tahsil Dondilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh.

2. Pratik Gupta, Son Of Anil Kumar Gupta, Aged About 22 Years R/o Vivekanand Chowk, Main Road, Dondilohara, Ward No. 7, Tahsil Dondilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh.

3. Mohanlal Gupta, Son Of Changulal Gupta, Aged About 57 Years R/o Vivekanand Chowk, Main Road, Dondilohara, Ward No. 7, Tahsil Dondilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Nagriya Prashashan Vikas Vibhag, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector, District Balod, Chhattisgarh.

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Balod, Chhattisgarh.

4. Tahsildar, Dondilohara, District Balod, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Parag Kotecha, Advocate For State : Mr. B. Gopa Kumar, Deputy Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 03/01/2018 (1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that impugned notice has been issued by respondent No.4 against the petitioners for removal of encroachment for the purpose of widening of road whereas earlier notice for removal of encroachment issued against the petitioners has been closed in their favour, therefore, the impugned notice is illegal and bad in law.

(2) Be that as it may, the petitioners are at liberty to file reply before the respondent authorities within a period of 15 days from today. If such reply is filed by the petitioners before the respondent authorities, in that event respondent authorities shall consider and decide the reply within a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of reply. (3) For a period of six weeks, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners.

(4) With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge L/-