1 2025:CGHC:5992 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 685 of 2025 1 - Suresh Patel S/o Banshi Lal Aged About 88 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 2 - Laxmi W/o Vinod Aged About 57 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 3 - Dhiraj Bansod S/o Devchand Bansod Aged About 52 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 4 - Meera Bai W/o Late Keshavrao Aged About 75 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 5 - Parveen Bano W/o Mustak Ahmad Khan Aged About 55 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 6 - Ajit Kumar Jain S/o Balchand Jain Aged About 70 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 7 - Chandrakant Sharma W/o Vijay Kumar Aged About 51 Years R/o AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.02.05 17:54:53 +0530 2 Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 8 - Nashin Bano W/o Sheikh Lala Aged About 46 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 9 - Ganesh Rao S/o Shankar Rao Aged About 34 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 10 - Shenaaz Begum W/o Yusuf Khan Aged About 62 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 11 - Sunita Marchittiwar W/o Kishor Kumar Aged About 50 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 12 - Suresh Verma S/o Gendlal Verma Aged About 43 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. 13 - Ikraramudin S/o Gulam Nabi Aged About 34 Years R/o Gayatri Mandir Road Aazad Chowk Ruabandha, Risali, District- Durg, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, Urban Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, C.G. 2 - Executive Engineer Chhattisgarh Housing Board, Utai Road Behind LIC Office Padmanbpur Durg, C.G. 3 3 - Nagar Palika Nigam Risali Through Commissioner, Risali Bhilai, District- Durg, C.G. ….Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.K. Jha, Advocate For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. Satish Gupta, G.A. For Respondent/Housing Board : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate For Respondent No.3. Ms. Sandhya Rao, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 03/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners are questioning the communication dated 14/01/2025, issued by the C.G. Housing Board, Division Durg, by which, the respondent/Housing Board has directed the petitioners to remove the illegal encroachment and constructions over the land bearing Khasra No.4/2 area of 3.75 acres. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are having possession over the plot in question under the Pattas granted by the then Government of Madhya Pradesh and they are making payment of property tax to the Municipal Corporation. However, the impugned notice for removal of encroachment has been issued by the Housing Board on 14/01/2025 without providing any opportunity of hearing and without issuance of any notice to the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the Housing Board/respondent No.2, on instructions, submits that that the petitioner never approached 4 the Board, whereas the land on which they are claiming and the land for which the Pattas are granted are different and if the petitioners will approach the Housing Board, their grievance shall be considered and necessary order will be passed in accordingly. He further submits that the land, in which, the petitioner are having illegal possession, the said land has been purchased by the Housing Board from the Bhilai Steel Plant on 13/12/2010. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State and counsel for the respondent No.3 have no objection to the contentions made by learned counsel for the respondent No.2/Housing Board. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the communication dated 14.01.2025. 6. From perusal of the said document, it appears that the petitioners have never heard before issuance of the communication dated 14/01/2025 and no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the petitioners, hence, the Housing Board/respondent is directed to issue individual notice to the petitioners within a period of one week and the petitioners on receiving the said notices, within a further period of fifteen days, they may submit their reply or representation to the Housing Board along with their documents on the basis of which they are claiming their ownership and the possession. After hearing the parties, the Housing Board shall take a decision about the possession and constructions made by the 5 petitioners within a period of thirty days from the date of submission of reply by the petitioners. Till fifty days, impugned order dated 14/01/2025 Annexure P-3 shall remain stayed. 7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep