1 2025:CGHC:40875 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2859 of 2024 1 - Mohd. Amin Meman S/o Abdul Rahim Aged About 40 Years R/o Ward No. 9, Bazar Para, Basna, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mantralay, Mahandi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Tahsil Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Tahsil Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 5 - Nayab Tahsildar Tahsil Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 6 - Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Basna, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.08.18 10:58:59 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri Shikhar Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State : Ms. Upasna Mehta, Dy.GA For Respondent No.6 : Shri R.S.Baghel, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 13/08/2025 The petitioner by way of this petition has prayed for the following reliefs : 10.1. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/order/direction as to restrain the respondents from demolishing the shops of the petitioner. 10.2. That any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favor of the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the State raised preliminary objection stating that the petition itself is not maintainable as no notice has been issued to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the State raised an objection that the petitioner is in illegal possession of Government Grass Land and no notice has been issued to the petitioner. A general notice has been published in the newspaper upon which the petition has been filed which is not maintainable at all. 4. The respondent/ Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Basna, District- Mahasamund has filed its return stating that that petitioner is in illegal possession of Government Grass Land and no individual notice has been issued to the petitioner as such, only on the general notice this petition is not maintainable. 3 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and further considering this aspect that only on the basis of paper clip this petition has been filed, I do not consider this case to entertain and to pass necessary order. 6. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of in the light of the order passed in batch of petitions ie. WPC No. 2891 of 2024 dated 20.03.2025. However, the respondent authorities are at liberty to issue individual notice to the petitioner showing show cause as why he may not be removed and, in turn, the petitioner is also at liberty to file their reply explaining why they are in possession of the land in question. 7. In case, notice has been received for removal of encroachment, the petitioner is directed to file his reply annexing the relevant documents showing this fact that he is not encroacher. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge