1 2025:CGHC:23808 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2800 of 2025 1 - Shiv Prasad Prajapati S/o Late Shri Ratan Lal Prajapati Aged About 40 Years R/o In Front Of S.E.C.L. Office, Ratan Hotel, Chantidih, Bilsapur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Aadesh Prajapati S/o Late Shri Devi Prasad Prajapati Aged About 34 Years R/o In Front Of S.E.C.L. Office, Ratan Hotel, Chantidih, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Laxmi Prasad Prajapati S/o Late Shri Ratan Lal Prajapati Aged About 51 Years R/o In Front Of S.E.C.L. Office, Ratan Hotel, Chantidih, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Durga Prasad Prajapati S/o Late Shri Ratan Lal Prajapati Aged About 55 Years R/o In Front Of S.E.C.L. Office, Ratan Hotel, Chantidih, Bilaspur, Police Station Sarkanda, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2-Collector District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director Town And Country Planning, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Municipal Corporation Bilaspur Through Its Commissioner, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Bhawan Adhikari Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2 6 - Zone In-Charge Zone No. 7, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, C.G. ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Vivek Kumar Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A. For Respondents No. 4,5, &6 : Mr. A. S. Kachchwaha, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 13/06/2025 With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 1. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 04.06.2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by the respondents by which respondent-authority has issued notice to the petitioner for demolition of the property of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is rightful owner and possession holder of the land situated at Chantidih, Patwari Halka No. 33, Revenue Inspector Circle Sarkanda, Bilaspur bearing Khasra No. 371/4 and 371/7 and seven shops are situated belonging to the petitioners for which he has been paying property tax and commercial tax to the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, but the respondent authorities wants to widening the road after demolishing the aforesaid property of the petitioner. The petitioner has filed revenue documents of the suit property along with the petitioner (Annexure P-3). He would further submit that the Municipal Corporation can acquire the land of any person under the doctrine of “eminent domain” but by compensating the owner of the land by following due procedure of law and he has no objection about the progress of work for construction of road. He would further submit that his only grievances is that if there is construction/demolition on any part of the suit property of the petitioner is made by the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur then compensation ought to have been given to the petitioner for the same after demarcating the said suit property in presence of the petitioner in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation opposes 3 the submission and submits that removal of any illegal encroachment would be only after proper ascertainment of the fact whether there is in-fact any illegal encroachment or not. He further submits that if any part of the land of the petitioner is acquired by the Municipal Corporation then they will pay extra Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to the petitioner. 4. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. In view of the foregoing discussion, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent-authorities that demarcation of land has already been done and no encroachment was found on the government land and if any demolition/construction is made on the petitioner’s suit property, the respondents shall pay compensation to the petitioner for the said suit property as per provision of law. 6. With the aforesaid observations & directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti