1 2025:CGHC:17145 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3493 of 2022 1 - Chitralekha Mahalwar W/o Shri Gauri Shankar Mahalwar Aged About 64 Years R/o Ward No. 12, 455/ Kh In Front Of Koteshwar Shiv Mandir, Krishna Nagar, Kota Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Raipur , District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Municipal Corporation Raipur Through Its Commissioner, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Zone Commissioner Zone No. 7, Municipal Corporation, Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vivek Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Santosh Bharat, Panel Lawyer. For Respondents No. 2 & 3 : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate. Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/04/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “a. A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate do issue calling for the records from the respondent concerned pertaining to the case of petitioner for kind perusal, if deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. b. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of certiorari do issue quashing the notice dated 23.3.2022 (Annexure P-7) being illegal, arbitrary and not tenable in the facts and circumstances of the case. c. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue directing the respondent Collector to consider and decide the application of the petitioner for grant of lease in respect of land in question in accordance with law within the time frame. as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court in the facts and circumstances of the case. d. Cost of the proceedings. e. Any other writs and directions that may be deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of case.” 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has constructed her house on her own land, however, the Municipal Corporation, Raipur has issued a notice to the petitioner for removal of encroachment made by her. He further submits that the petitioner has moved an application for settlement of some portion of land for which according to the respondents it is Government Land. 3. Learned counsel for respondents No. 2 & 3 submits that the petitioner has raised some construction in the Government Land and as such it is required to be removed. He further submits that a temporary tin shed has been constructed on the public road as such it is directed to be removed. 4. Upon which learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that she will remove the tin shed which is coming on the public road, however, she prays that since she has filed an application for allotment of land before the Collector, Raipur as such the concerned authorities may be directed to consider her application for grant of lease (patta) in respect of the land which her Tin shed and boundary wall has been raised. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is directed to remove tin shed which has been constructed by her. However, so far as boundary wall is concerned the respondent authorities especially the Collector, 4 Raipur is directed to consider her application for grant of lease (patta) of the said land and if any lease (patta) can be granted to the petitioner the same shall be considered in accordance with law. 6. Till the decision of the application for grant of lease (patta) the boundary wall of the petitioner may not be removed. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not made any opinion on merits of the case, it is to the concerned Collector to pass appropriate order in this respect. 8. With this observation, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat