1 2025:CGHC:8359 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3880 of 2024 1 - Banarasi Prasad Gupta S/o Late Lalji Gupta Aged About 64 Years R/o Dharamjaigarh, Tehsil - Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 2 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Rev) (Sdo - Rev) Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3 - Chief Municipal Officer (Cmo) Nagar Panchayat Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - Prabhakar Shukla Posted As C.M.O. Nagar Panchayat Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - Kawaljit Singh Komal S/o Late Agand Singh R/o Bus Stand, Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashutosh Biswas, Advocate For Resp No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Mayur Khandelwal, PL For Resp. No. 5 : Mr. Abhishek Saraff, Advocate (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 18/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction towards respondent No. 4/CMO, Nagar Panchayat Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh to comply with the order dated 19/02/2024 passed by Additional RAHUL JHA Digitally signed by RAHUL JHA Date: 2025.02.18 16:04:17 +0530 2 Collector in अ०्ቚ०क० 202305042000012/88/बी-121/2022-23, whereby the Additional Collector has affirmed the order dated 24/04/2023 (Annexure-P/2) passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Dharamjaigarh by which the SDO had directed respondent No.5 to remove the Shutter which has been installed near the Shop No. 13 of the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that inspite of the order dated 24/03/2023 passed by the SDO and order dated 19/02/2024 passed by the Additional Collector, the CMO/respondent No.4 is not complying with the aforesaid orders. 3. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5, by placing an order dated 20/06/2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, would submit that the order dated 19/02/2024 passed by the Additional Collector as well as order dated 24/03/2023 passed by the SDO are under challenge in an appeal, wherein an order has been passed directing the parties to maintain the status-quo. He submits that the petitioner is also party to the said appeal, but without disclosing such fact, he has preferred the instant petition, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable. 4. A photocopy of order dated 20/06/2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner and copy of memo of appeal preferred under Section 44 (2) of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 are placed by the counsel for respondent No.5, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the order dated 3 20/06/2024 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bilaspur Division in appeal. 6. From perusal of order dated 20/06/2024 and memo of appeal, it appears that the order of the SDO as well as the order of Additional Collector are under challenge in an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, wherein an order of Status-quo has been passed, however, the writ petition, questioning the order of SDO as well as order of Additional Collector, does not disclose such fact anywhere in the writ petition, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable, and accordingly, the same is dismissed. 7. The petitioner is at liberty to approach before the Additional Commissioner by filing a reply to the appeal filed by respondent No.5. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU) JUDGE Rahul