1 2025:CGHC:46270 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4875 of 2025 1 - Jitendra Jogewar S/o Late Shri Satya Prakash Jogewar Aged About 66 Years R/o Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 43, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg, C.G. 2 - Smt. Aruna Jogewar W/o Jitendra Jogewar Aged About 62 Years R/o Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 43, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. 2 - The Collector Durg, District Durg, C.G. 3 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Durg, Behind New Bus Stand, Gaurav Path, Durg, District Durg, C.G. 4 - Navin Kumar Singroul S/o Shri Ravinarayan Singroul R/o Adarsh Nagar, Ward No. 43, Durg, Tahsil And District Durg, C.G. ... Respondent(s) 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri D.N.Prajapati, Advocate For Respondent/State : Shri Ajit Singh, GA For Respondent No. 2 & 3 Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 10/09/2025 By way of this petition the petitioners are challenging the impugned final notice dated 09.09.2025 issued by the respondent No.3/ Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Durg whereby the petitioners are directed to remove the construction made by them over the land bearing Khasra No. 773/1-5 and 773/18 on or before 11.09.2025 failing which the said construction of the house would be removed forcefully in the presence of Magistrate and police on 12.09.2025. 2. Contention of the counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioner No.2 is the registered owner of the subject lands and after obtaining permission from the Municipal Authority, the petitioners have constructed the house over the land. However, all of sudden, on the basis of vague complaint made by respondent No.4, respondent No.3 has issued impugned order cum notice for removal of the house of the petitioners without demarcation stating that the petitioners had encroached over the drain. 3. Counsel for the respondent No.2 & 3 submits that the dispute essentially relates to the demarcation of land. It was contended that unless the demarcation of the petitioner’s land vis-a-vis the adjoining government land is conducted, the precise extent of any alleged encroachment cannot be ascertained. He further submits that the 3 respondents are ready and willing to undertake the process of demarcation in accordance with law and to consider any representation that may be filed by the petitioner. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of keeping the present petition pending, it may be disposed of with liberty tot h petitioner to submit a detailed representation before the respondents No.2 & 3 within a period of 15 days form the date of receipt of this order. Upon such representation being filed, the said respondents shall consider and decide the same objectively and strictly in accordance with law. 5. It is further directed that until the aforesaid representation is being made and a decision is taken thereon, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners. 6. With the above observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.09.11 18:24:36 +0530