2025:CGHC:14114 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4583 of 2019 1 - Amir Chaturvedi S/o Basant Chaturwedi Aged About 35 Years R/o H Type Quarter, Block No. F - 10, Raawanbhatha, Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary , Department Of Home Affairs Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan , Nawa Raipur , Distt Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Superintendent Of Police Mungeli, Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh., District : Mungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioner : None appears even in the second round. For State : Mr. Sanjeev Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 24.03.2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “(i) Pass an order setting aside the impugned allotment order dated 30.09.2019 and impugned notice of eviction dated 24.10.2019 passed by S.P. Mungeli. (ii) Pass an order directing the respondent no. 2 to allow the Petitioner to remain in the Government Quarter till his application for allotment is not decided by Competent Authority. (iii) Pass any other order the Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the interest of justice;” REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- 2. The facts of the present case are that the petitioner is an employee of the Police Department and at present, posted in District Mungeli under respondent No.2/Superintendent of Police, Mungeli. A Government accommodation was allotted to one Ms. Pushpa Dhruv vide order dated 30.09.2019, issued by the Superintendent of Police, Mungeli and the order of allotment of the accommodation was never issued in favour of the petitioner but the petitioner took forceful possession of the accommodation. Therefore, an eviction notice was issued by the Superintendent of Police, Mungeli on 24.10.2019 and thereafter, a second notice was issued by the said authority on 27.11.2019. 3. A perusal of the documents would show that the Government accommodation was allotted to one Ms. Pushpa Dhruv vide order dated 30.09.2019 issued by respondent No.2/Superintendent of Police, Mungeli and no specific order was issued in favour of the petitioner. 4. It is also evident that the petitioner forcibly took possession of the accommodation and refused to vacate the accommodation, therefore, eviction notices were issued by the Superintendent of Police, Mungeli. 5. In the present case, no interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner and further, the petitioner has no right to retain possession of the Government accommodation. Consequently, the present petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha