1 2025:CGHC:2570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 304 of 2025 1 Devendra Markandey S/o Madan Markandey Aged About 42 Years R/o Ward No. 16, Kuwara, Navagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 Collector Bemetara District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 3 Sub Divisional Officer Navagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 4 Tehsildar / Executive Magistrate Navagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 5 Tehsildar / Executive Magistrate Nandghat, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 6 Superintendent Of Police Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 7 Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Kuwara, Block- Navagarh, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) 2 ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Shailendra Kumar Bajpai, Advocate For Respondent(s) / State : Shri Satish Gupta, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 15/01/2025 Heard. 1. By the present writ petition the petitioner is questioning the order dated 12.01.2025 issued by the Additional District Magistrate by which the administrative Officers have been assigned the work to maintain the law and order as the respondents are taking steps for removal of possession of the petitioner from the land in question where he is residing for the last 20 years by constructing a house with the help of fund sanctioned under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to notice/ communication dated 01.01.2025, and submits that the Gram Panchayat i.e. Respondent No. 7 has issued a notice/ direction to the petitioner to remove the possession over the land in question within a period of 3 days. He further submits that the said 3 proceeding has been initiated under Section 56 of the C.G. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam 1993 (for short ‘Adhiniyam, 1993’ ). He submits that section 56 (4) of the Adhiniyam, 1993 states that the Gram Panchayat shall not pass any order in exercise of this section until person concern has been given reasonable time and opportunity of being heard. He further submits that In the present case notice/ direction for removal of possession has been issued by the Gram Panchayat without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the notice/ communication dated 01.01.2025, is itself a notice in which explanation has been sought by the petitioner for removal of the possession made by him. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents attached. 5. Perusal of order dated 12.01.2025 issued by the Office of Additional District Magistrate shows that work has been assigned to administrative Officers to remove the encroachment on the basis of proposal made by the Gram Panchayat under the Adhiniyam, 1993. Further, perusal of the notice/ communication dated 01.01.2025 of the Respondent No. 7 i.e. Gram Panchayat to the petitioner shows that the Gram Panchayat has already taken a decision to remove the possession of the petitioner from the said land and directed the petitioner to remove the alleged 4 encroachment within 3 days. However, Gram Panchayat though referred to provisions under Section 56 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 in the notice dated 01.01.2025, but it appears from the said notice of removal of encroachment to the petitioner that before directing removal of alleged encroachment provisions of section 56 (4) has not been complied with and without issuance of notice and without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner the communication/ notice of removal of encroachment has been issued directing the petitioner to remove the alleged encroachment within a period of 3 days. It is therefore, directed that removal of the petitioner from the land in question shall not be made without complying with Section 56 (4) of the Adhiniyam, 1993. Therefore, the notice/ communication dated 01.01.2025 (Annexure P-1) is quashed, however, liberty is reserved for the Gram Panchayat to proceed under Section 56 of the Adhiniyam, 1993 by giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in accordance with the provisions prescribed under Section 56 (4 ) of the Adhiniyam, 1993. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) JUDGE Jyoti