1 2025:CGHC:7637-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 113 of 2025 Dashrath Sona S/o Late Shakti Lal Sona Aged About 50 Years R/o Akashvani Utkal Nagar Raj Bhawan Road, Kali Mandir Beside Gourishankar Temple Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Represented Through Commissioner Raipur Division District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Additional Collector District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Prescribed Officer Municipal Corporation Raipur Zone No. 4, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Nazul, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Kapil Tandi S/o Hament Tandi R/o Panchshil Nagar, Utkal Nagar, Raipur Tehsil - District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Dy. Govt. Advocate For Respondent No.3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 13 . 02 .202 5 1. Heard Mr. Sourabh Sahu, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Deputy Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent Nos. 1, 2 & 4 and Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.3. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Date: 2025.02.13 16:37:47 +0530 2 2. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 14.01.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 240 of 2025, whereby it was directed to provide 15 days time from 08.01.2025 to the petitioner to remove the possession / construction from the land in question. It was further directed that after 15 days from 08.01.2025, respondent No.3 will be free to remove the possession / construction made by the petitioner from the said land. 3. As the present appeal has been filed against the interlocutory order passed by the learned Single Judge and the appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 2 (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006, but learned counsel for the appellant states that the nature of order which has been passed by the learned Single Judge goes to show that it amounts to final order which would prejudice the right of the appellant if the matter is not heard by this Court. 4. In view of the above, the instant appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. However, we request the learned Single Judge to hear the writ petition on merits and decide the same within a period of one week from the date of production of certified copy of this order. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra