1 2025:CGHC:25577 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3034 of 2025 1 - Prabhat Gupta S/o Shri Chandrashekhar Gupta Aged About 49 Years R/o Zuna Bilaspur, Baniyapara, Bilaspur, Tahsil And District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Urban Administration Of Local Bodies Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Municipal Corporation Through The Commissioner, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Commissioner The Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Bhawan Adhikari The Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr Akash Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 For Respondent No. 2-4 : : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. A.G. Mr. S. S. Baghel, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 19/06/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2 2. The petitioner has file this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 30.05.2025 passed by the respondent no. 4 whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove his 5 shops for which he has been paying property tax and commercial tax to the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the owner of suit lands bearing Khasra Nos. 406/6 situated at Village Chantidih, in front of Durga Mastana Temple, Revenue Circle and Tehsil- Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur for which he has been paying property tax and commercial tax to the Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur but the respondent no. 4 is acting arbitrarily and issued notice dated 30.05.2025 to remove the encroachment within 24 hours, otherwise the Municipal Corporation Bilaspur would raze the building with JCB. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent opposes 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 is acquired by the Municipal Corporation they they will pay extra Floor Area Ratio (FAR) to the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. In view of the foregoing submission, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authorities that if any construction is made on the petitioner’s suit property, the respondents shall demarcate the land of the petitioner in his presence and thereafter pay compensation to the 3 petitioner for the said suit property as per provision of law. 7. With the aforesaid observations & directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima