Ajay Kumar Nanwani v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2517 of 2016 • Ajay Kumar Nanwani S/o Late Nanak Ram Nanwani, Aged About 37 Years R/o 38 Nanak Nivas, Capital City, Phase 1, Behind Ambuja Mall Urkura, Road, Saddu, Raipur, Distirct Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Thorugh The Secretary, Department Of Accommodation And Enviornment, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya New Raipur Chhattisgarh,

2. Commissioner Cum Director, Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Naya Raipur Distirct Raipur Chhattisgarh,

3. Collector, Distirct Raipur Chhattisgarh

4. Chief Executive Officer, Raipur Development Athority, Bhakt Mata Karma Parisar, New Rajendra Nagar Raipur, Distirct Raipur Chhattisgarh

5. Municipal Corporation, Raipur Through Its Commissioner, Raipur Chhattisgarh,

6. Sanjay Bajpai, Builders Private Limited New Swagat Vihar Project, Through Its Managing Director Smt. Sarita Bajpai, R/o 3rd Floor, Krishna Complex, Jail Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattissgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Manish Upadhyay, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Kamal Nayan Chaturvedi, Advocate For State :

Ms. Anjali Singh Chouhan, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 5 :

Mr. H. B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No. 6 :

Ms. Preeti Jha, Advocate on behalf of Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board 16.09.2019

1. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the point involved in this writ petition has already been decided and covered by the decision of this Court in WPC No. 2027 of 2016 (Smt. Prabha Jain v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others). Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the decision rendered by this Court in WPC No. 2027 of 2016.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, considered his submission made hereinabove and went through the record with utmost circumspection.

3. In Smt. Prabha Jain (supra), the following order was passed: "1. W.P. (C) Nos. 2009/2015 and 2010/2015 have been allowed by a separate order dated 13.09.2017 subject to certain directions. These writ petitions are also disposed of, at present, in terms of the order passed in W.P. (C) Nos. 2009/2015 and 2010/2015. However, if occasion arises the petitioners are at liberty to raise grounds available to them under the law.

2. Mr. B.P. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 5, would submit that all the allottees who have been alloted the land owned by respondent No. 5- M/s Sanjay Bajpai Builders Private Limited shall be allotted encumbrance free land owned by respondent No. 5 on the basis of mutual consent.

3. The statement is taken on record.

4. No order as to cost(s)."

4. In view of the aforesaid statement, the writ petition finally stands disposed of in terms of judgment rendered by this Court in Smt. Prabha Jain (supra).

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Vishakha