1 / 4 2025:CGHC:36081 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3930 of 2025 Ramprasad Rahi S/o Shri Kapilram Rahi, Aged About 49 Years R/o Village Misda, Tehsil Shivrinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary Department Of Water Resource And Irrigation, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Janjgir-Champa, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 4 - Executive Engineer Hasdeo Water Management Division Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 5 - Sub Divisional Officer, (Irrigation) Janjgir Branch Canal Sub Division No. 3, Birra, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 6 - Tehsildar Tehsil Shivarinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 7 - Usha Bai Sahu, W/o Siyaram Sahu, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Misda, Tehsil Shivarinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh 8 - Hemant Kumar Sahu, S/o Siyaram Sahu, Aged About 26 Years R/o Village Misda, Tehsil Shivarinarayan, District Janjgir-Champa Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Satish Gupta, GA ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.07.28 16:56:41 +0530 2 / 4 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 25/07/2025 1. The instant petition has been filed challenging the impugned notice dated 16/07/2025 issued by Respondent No.5 whereby the petitioner has been directed to remove the house from the subject land. 2. The Respondents No.7 & 8 earlier filed a writ petition bearing WPC No.3632 of 2024 for seeking a direction from the Respondents No.4 & 5 therein to take necessary steps for removing encroachment made by Respondent No.8 over the bank of canal within specified time. This Court on 06/08/2024 disposed of the said writ petition and observed thus:- 6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4 and 5 to conclude the proceedings initiated against respondent No.8 pursuant to the notice dated 12.05.2023 (Annexure P-5) in accordance with law within further period of three months from the date of receipt of order. 3. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a writ petition bearing WPC No.1446 of 2025 challenging the legality, validity and propriety of the impugned notice dated 05.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.5 arising out of order dated 03.03.2025 passed by Respondent No.4 as well as order dated 20.02.2025 passed by Respondent No.6, whereby a direction was given to the petitioner to remove illegal construction of his house within a period of seven days. The said writ petition 3 / 4 was also disposed of by this Court and the Court has observed thus :- 9. Considering the facts and circumstance of the case, the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer, Department of Water and Irrigation, Janjgir, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) is directed to give some time to the petitioner to explain about his illegal possession and to file appropriate reply to the notice. The petitioner is being given 10 days’ time to explain the contents of the notice along with all relevant documents and in turn, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Janjgir is directed to consider the same in accordance with law and to pass a well reasoned order within a further period of 10 days. 10. However, this Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, but looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, within a period of 20 days, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner i.e. till the decision of reply of the petitioner. 11. With the aforementioned observation/direction, writ petition stands disposed of. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that before removal of the house of the petitioner an alternative arrangement must have been done by the respondent authorities for rehabilitation of the petitioner, therefore, the impugned notice may be quashed. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel opposes the submissions made by 4 / 4 learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the documents with utmost circumspection. 7. Be that as it may, considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case specially the rainy season which is going on, it is directed that no demolition shall be done on the subject land of the petitioner for a period of 30 days, if not already demolished and thereafter after expiry of 30 days time, the respondent authorities shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 8. With the aforesaid observation the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu