1 2025:CGHC:38251 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4099 of 2025 1 - Shri Shatrughan Ram Sahu S/o Late Shri Ramprasad Sahu Aged About 83 Years R/o C-14, Kanchan Ganga Phase-2, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh (Correct Name) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar Chhattisgarh 2 - Municipal Corporation Raipur Through Its Commissioner, White House, Kalibadi, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Zonal Commissioner Zone No. 05, Municipal Corporation Raipur, Agrasen Chowk, Telpani Naka Road, Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - The Zonal Commissioner Zone No. 07, Municipal Corporation Raipur, Agrasen Chowk, Telpani Naka Road, Raipur Chhattisgarh 5 - Ramnik Lal Sahu S/o Shri Chatur Lal Sahu Aged About 67 Years R/o R- 5 Kanchan Ganga Phase-2, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh 6 - Pramod Sahu S/o Shri Chatur Lal Sahu Aged About 63 Years R/o R-5 Kanchan Ganga Phase-2, Dangania, Raipur Chhattisgarh ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Achal Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. Anurag Tripathi, P.L. For Corporation : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 04/08/2025 Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.08.06 10:51:39 +0530 2 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the continued inaction of the respondent authorities in failing to take action against the illegal construction and encroachment by respondent No. 4, despite multiple order/communications dated 14.12.2023, 05.03.2024 and 28.05.2025. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he Petitioner is a senior citizen and a retired professor, who is the lawful owner of Plot No. C-14, situated in Kanchan Ganga Phase-2, Raipur, possessing all requisite legal documents, sanctions, and permissions pertaining thereto. It is respectfully submitted that Respondent No. 4, namely Ramnik Lal Sahu, has illegally constructed a three-storey structure encroaching upon public land adjoining the Petitioner's property, thereby causing substantial interference with the Petitioner's lawful possession, enjoyment, and access to civic amenities. Despite the Petitioner's repeated representations, complaints, and issuance of legal notices/Communications and orders from the authorities no remedial action has been taken by the Respondents as the private respondent no.6 in particular was a officer of the Municipal Corporation. 3. Learned counsel for respondents that there is dispute between the petitioner and private respondent No. 5 & 6 and there is an alternative remedy is available to petitioner to file a civil suit. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 3 5. Considering the submission of the respondents and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that there is dispute between the private party which can be redressed before a civil Court, therefore there is an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner to file a civil suit. 6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti