1 2025:CGHC:7197 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 650 of 2022 1 - Anil Kumar Ramteke S/o Sunder Lal Ramteke, Aged About 50 Years R/o H. No. 36, Ward No. 4, Near Rangmanch, Dalli Rajhara, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chief Municipal OfÏcer, Municipal Council, Dalli Rajhara, District Balod Chhattisgarh. 3 - Sub Divisional OfÏcer, Doundi Lohara, District Balod Chhattisgarh. 4 - Tehsildar, Dalli Rajhara, District Balod Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Pramod Ramteke, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Shri Ritesh Giri, Panel lawyer. For Respondent no. 2 : Shri Anmol Sharma, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri S.S. Baghel, Advocate. SHOAIB ANWAR Digitally signed by SHOAIB ANWAR Date: 2025.02.10 23:30:11 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board 10.02.2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the notice dated 08.08.2019 issued by the respondent no. 2, by which the respondents have directed the petitioner to remove the construction done by the petitioner as the same has been done by making encroachment over the excess land, though patta has been granted to the petitioner for only 280 sq. ft. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is raising construction over the land which has been granted on patta i.e. 280 sq. ft. area near under Rajiv Gandhi Aashray Yojana, however the notice has been issued by the respondent no. 2 for removal of the construction stating that there is an encroachment by the petitioner and on the said encroachment, the petitioner is raising construction. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the respondent be directed to make a demarcation and verification of the construction raised by the petitioner and if the authority found that any extra construction has been made in excess of 280 sq. ft. which has been allotted to the petitioner then the petitioner himself will remove the same. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2, Mr. Sharma submit that the land in question has been allotted to the petitioner by issuance of patta i.e. 280 sq. ft. under under Rajiv Gandhi Aashray Yojana. However, the petitioner is raising illegal construction and developing on 315 sq. ft. which is in excess of the allotted area to the petitioner. 3 Hence, the notice has been issued to remove the illegal construction raised by the petitioner over the encroached area in excess of 280 sq. ft. 4. I have heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the reply submitted the respondent. 5. From persual of paragraph 6 of the reply of the respondent no. 2, it appears that the petitioner has raised construction over 315 sq. ft. though only 280 sq. ft. has been allotted to the petitioner under Rajiv Gandhi Aashray Yojana. As per the learned counsel for the petitioner the authority of respondent no. 2 be directed to make a demarcation of the land in question and if in the said demarcation it is found that petitioner has raised any construction in excess of 280 sq. ft, then the petitioner himself shall remove the said illegal construction for the encroached land. 6. Hence the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no. 2 to take necessary steps for demarcation of land in question within a period of 30 days in presence of the petitioner and if any encroachment or illegal construction found then the petitioner shall remove the same within a further period of 15 days and if the petitioner failed to do so, the respondent no. 2 is free to take action in accordance with law for demolition of the illegal construction over the encroached land. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Shoaib