1 2025:CGHC:13427 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 513 of 2022 1 - Injana Keshwani Wd/o Late Chhunni Lal Keshwani, Aged About 55 Years 2 - Sunil Kumar Keshwani S/o Late Chhunni Lal Keshwani, Aged About 39 Years 3 - Kailash Kumar Keshwani S/o Late Chhunni Lal Keshwani, Aged About 36 Years All are R/o. Ratnabandha Chowk, Beside of Gayyur Material Supplier, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - Haji Naseem, President Anjuman Islamia Committee, Amapara, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. (Petitioner), 2 - Shri P.S. Elma, Collector, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 3 - Shri Manish Mishra, Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 4 - Shri Ketan Bhoyar, Tahsildar, Dhamtar, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. 5 - Amar Sukhwani, S/o Manohar Lal Sukhwani, Aged About 39 Years R/o. Vivekanand Colony, Gali No. 3, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Shri Somkant Verma and Shri Manohar Dewangan, Advocates. For Respondent No.1 : Shri Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate. For Respondent No.2&4: Ms. Aditi Diwan on behalf of Shri Pawan Kesharwani, Advocate. For Respondent No.3 : Shri Shivam Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent No.5 : Shri Shyam Kumar on behalf of Shri Achyut Tiwari, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Order reserved on 04.10.2024 Order delivered on 20.03.2025 1. The present contempt case has been filed by the petitioners, who are respondents No.6(A) to 6(C) in the writ petition, alleging willful Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2025.03.27 11:52:48 +0530 2 disobedience of interim order dated 27.07.2012 passed in WPC No.1366 of 2012 and illegal construction being raised by the respondents over the land in dispute. 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the land bearing Khasra No.209 Area 2.70 Acres of land situated at village Dhamtari, Tehsil and District Dhamtari is the government land. Some part of the land was allotted to Anjuman Islamiya Committee Dhamtari, but its ownership still rests with the State Govt. A Civil Suit was decided between the parties and the Civil Suit filed by Anjuman Islamiya Committee was dismissed on the ground that they could not produce the earlier lease deed granted in his favour. A writ petition was also filed by the petitioner Anjuman Islamiya before this court vide WPC No.1366 of 2012 in which an interim order was passed on 27.07.2012 restraining the parties from raising any construction over the land in question and directed the parties to maintain status quo as obtained today i.e. on 27.07.2012. It is the case of the petitioner that despite having an interim order dated 27.07.2012, the Anjuman Islamiya Committee has leased out various land/shops to the tenants and after obtaining building permission for construction, they started construction of shops on the subject land. Despite giving notice and intimation about interim order dated 27.07.2012 passed by this court, they have not stopped their construction work. Thus, they willfully violated the interim order passed by this court and they may be punished for contempt of court. 3. The respondent No.1 in his reply submitted that since the shop was dilapidated, therefore, they obtained permission from Municipal 3 Corporation for its renovation. There was no new construction over the land in question. He would further submit that if existing shops were not renovated in time, there was every possibility of it being collapsed and loss of life also. Therefore, there is no willful violation of court’s order dated 27.07.2012. 4. The respondent No.2 & 4 denied the allegations made against them and submitted that the contempt petitioner himself violated the interim order passed by this court in the writ petition and he himself started new construction over the land in question for which Tehsildar Dhamtari had issued a stay order on 06.09.2018 staying construction being raised by Chunni Lal Keshwani. It is also submitted that in order to create pressure upon the respondents, the present contempt petition has been filed. 5. The respondent No.3 also filed its reply and submitted that he assumed the office of Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Dhamtari on 08.03.2021 who continued till 25.05.2022, however, building permission was granted by his predecessor on 07.12.2020, therefore, he has been wrongly impleaded in the present contempt petition and he may be discharged. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material annexed with the contempt petition. 7. Since the original Writ Petition (C) No.1366 of 2012 filed by the respondent/Anjuman Islamiya is allowed and by setting aside the impugned order dated 24.04.2012 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Raipur, the matter having been remitted back to Collector, Dhamtari, for re-considering the case afresh after providing 4 opportunity of hearing to both the parties, I deem it appropriate to close the contempt petition at present. 8. Accordingly, the present contempt petition stands disposed of. The petitioners are at liberty to take recourse of law if cause of action arises. Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) Judge inder