1 / 3 2025:CGHC:11372 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1306 of 2025 1 Ramashankar Vaishya S/o Ashrafi Vaishya Aged About 60 Years R/o Ward No. 22, Mahatma Gandhi Nagar, Camp - 2, Power House, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 The Collector Durg, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 3 The Commissioner Nagar Palik Nigam, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 4 The Zone Commissioner Zone No. 3, Nagar Palik Nigam, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh. 5 Gulabchand S/o Ram Niwas Aged About 66 Years R/o Sharda Para, Camp - 2, Power House, Bhilai, Tahsil And District Durg Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.03.11 10:23:36 +0530 2 / 3 For Petitioner : Shri V.K. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent/ State : Ms. Nupoor Sonkar, P.L. For Respondents No. 3 & 4 : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Advocate (HON’BLE JUSTICE SHRI BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 07/03/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner, is questioning the notice dated 20.02.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Municipal Corporation, Bhilai stating that the petitioner is the owner of the plot/ shop No. 2 which has been allotted to the petitioner by the Municipal Corporation, however, by issuance of notice the Corporation has directed the petitioner to remove the illegal encroachment from Shop/ plot No. 3, despite the fact that petitioner is having possession over the shop/ plot No. 2 only and the petitioner has nothing to do with the shop/ plot No. 3. 2. Learned counsel appearing for Municipal corporation would submit that the notice has been issued to the petitioner on the pretext that the petitioner has encroached upon some 3 / 3 part of plot/ shop No. 3 and only to comply with the direction of this Court in WPC No. 1728 of 2020 decided on 12.07.2020, the notice has been issued to the petitioner to clear the illegal encroachment made by the petitioner over plot/ shop No. 3. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents attached with the petition. 4. From perusal of the impugned notice, it appears that the same has been issued to the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment over plot/shop No. 3. 5. Considering the same, it is directed that if the petitioner is having possession over plot/ shop No. 2, then his possession shall not be disturbed by the corporation, however, the corporation is free to proceed in pursuance to the notice dated 20.02.2025, if the petitioner is having any illegal encroachment over plot/ shop No. 3. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Jyoti