1 2026:CGHC:14140 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 992 of 2026 Satyam Shivam Sundaram Shukla S/o Durga Prasad Shukla Aged About 42 Years By Caste Bramhin, R/o Ward No. 10, Mathpara, Rajmahal Chowk, Samnapur Marg, Kawardha, Post And Tahsil Kawrdha, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner. Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector Office Of The Collectorate, Kabirdham, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Executive Officer Public Works Department, Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council Kawardha, District Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Tahsildar Office Of The Tahsil At Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents. (cause title downloaded from CIS Periphery) For Petitioner : Mr. Vikas Kumar Pandey, Advocate. For Res No.1,2,3,4 & 6 /State : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. AG. For Res No.5 : Mr. Abhishek Chandra Gupta, Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.03.25 12:29:48 +0530 2 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 24/03/2026 1. This Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for the followings reliefs:- "10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct to the respondent authorities not to demolish the structure infrastructure i.e. house building, shops and office of the petitioner. 10.3 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to decide pending representation which is still pending before the competent authorities. 10.4 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to give compensation as per land acquisition Act is concerned and give ample time to vacate the house and shops. 10.5 Any other relief, which may be deemed, fit by this Hon'ble Court just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be provided in favour of the petitioner." 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that father of the petitioner namely Durga Prasad Shukla has gifted him piece of land bearing Land Sheet No.10-B, Land Bearing No.23/6, Rakba 43.19 square meter and Land bearing No.24, Area 5 square meter in total 48.19 square meter situated in Rajmahal Chowk, Samnapur Road Kawardha, District Kabirdham which is been duly recorded in the name of petitioner in the revenue record. 3 However, despite such fact, without serving any notice to the petitioner the Authorities of the Respondent no. 5 came to the house of petitioner and threatened him to demolish his structure alleging that same as unauthorized. Counsel further submits that the structure raised by the petitioner is not unauthorized and petitioner has also filed representation in this regard on 13.01.2026 (Annexure- P/2), despite that claim of the petitioner has not been decided. Hence at this stage this petition may be disposed of directing respondent No.5 to decide representation of the petitioner expeditiously and till such decision interim protection may be granted to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for respondent No.5 who is main contesting party would submit that only measurement and demarcation has been carried out in the said area and no demolition process has been initiated, and if any such action will be initiated the notice would be duly served to the petitioner in accordance with law/rules. He also assures that the application filed by the petitioner will be decided expeditiously. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. From perusal of writ petition and submission of counsel for the parties, it appears that the petitioner has filed instant petition only in apprehension of demolition of some portion of subject land as no notice has been filed by the petitioner to show that demolition process has been initiated against his property/land. Moreover, counsel for respondent No.5 has also stated that no notice has been issued to the petitioner with regard to demolition yet. Hence, since no notice etc. has been filed by the petitioner, this Court does not find any cogent reason to grant interim protection to the petitioner. 6. However, considering the limited prayer of the petitioner, respondent No.5 is directed to decide application/representation dated 13.01.2026 filed by the 4 petitioner within period of 30 days from the date of receipt/submission of copy of this order. 7. with the aforesaid direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 8. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay