1 2025:CGHC:57613 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WP No. 4110 of 2003 1. Keshav Chand Choksey S/o Ram Prasad Choksey, aged about 45 years, R/o Shastri Nagar, Camp-1, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) 2. Smt. Shishu Patel W/o H M Patel, R/o Plot No.18, Shastri Nagar, Camp-1, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) 3. Smt. Rajni Patel W/o C L Patel, Plot No.17, Shastri Nagar, Camp- 1, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Environment & Urban Develop. Mantralaya, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2. Municipal Corporation Bhilai through its Commissioner, Bhilai, District Durg (CG) 3. Birjhu S/o Shri Samaru, aged about 46 years, R/o Shastri Nagar, Nahar Para, Bhilai (CG) 4. Lalji S/o Shri Brijlal, aged about 35 years, R/o Shastri Nagar, Nahar Para, Bhilai (CG) 5. Sanjay S/o Shri Salik Ram, aged about 40 years, R/o Opp. Ramnagar Kabristan, Bhilai (CG) 6. Vinod Kumar S/o Shri Ramdhani, aged about 33 years, R/o Durga Timber, Ramnagar, Bhilai (CG) ... Respondent(s) BHOLA NATH KHATAI Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.11.28 11:57:00 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. Rahul Ambast, Advocate & Mr. Ashutosh Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. H. A. P. S. Bhatia, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Sashwat Mishra, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 26/11/2025 1. Heard on I.A. No.06/2025, application for taking additional documents on record in view of the subsequent development and further disposal of the instant writ petition in terms of the order dated 26.11.2024 passed in WP No. 304/2001. 2. This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 27.11.2003 (Annexure P-23) passed by the respondent No.1 in Case No.6981/Na.Pra./02/18 whereby the allotment/settlement of land/plots in favour of the petitioners No.2 & 3 and the vendors of petitioner No.1 has been cancelled. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that a similar writ petition i.e. WP No.304/2001 has already been decided by the Co- ordinate Bench of this High Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 and the present writ petition may also be disposed of in similar terms. The operative paragraph of the said writ petition is as follows: “20. But considering the other submission made by the petitioners with regard to hostile discrimination alleging that other persons have been granted permission to construct commercial premises in the vicinity and in the revised master plan of Bhilai Durg (Review) 2031 the area where the property in question is situated has been declared as commercial area, therefore, the notice dated 08.09.2000, order dated 16.02.2001 and communication dated 03.03.2001 are quashed. The matter is remitted back to the Secretary, Town and Country Planning Department to 3 decide the matter afresh keeping in view the contentions of the petitioners whether other similarly situated persons have been granted permission to use their property as commercial property and the land in question has been declared as commercial property in master plan of Bhilai Durg (Review) 2031. The petitioners are also at liberty to produce additional documents or additional pleadings to substantiate their case with regard to discrimination and plea of review Master Plan 2031. This Court has stayed the effect and operation of the notice vide order dated 07.03.2001 and impugned order is continued till today. Since, this Court has remitted the matter to the Secretary for fresh adjudication the interim order passed by this Court shall continue for six months. The petitioners are directed to submit application for hearing of the matter within four weeks from the date of copy of the order and in turn the same shall be decided by the respondents within an outer limit of 4 months from the date of submission of the application.” 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 do not have any objection if this petition is decided in terms of the order passed by the co-ordinate Bench in WP No.304/2001. 5. In view of the submission made by the counsel for the parties, I.A. No.06 is allowed. Let the additional documents be taken on record. The present writ petition is accordingly disposed of in similar terms as has been passed in WP No.304/2001. 6. Let a copy of the order passed in WP No.304/2001 be also made part of the record of this writ petition. Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) JUDGE Khatai