Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 26483 (CHH)

JAYVIR SINGH GUPTA v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH SECRETARY

WPC/2055/2022 · 2026-07-09

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010133822022 2026:CGHC:28840 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2055 of 2022 1 - Jayvir Singh Gupta S/o Late Mahavir Singh Gupta, Aged About 58 Years R/o Chandi Mandir Road, Shiv Para, Tahsil And, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, Durg,, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director, Town And Country Planning, Regional Office Behind Collectrate Campus, Mahavir Nagar, Balak Bhawan Path, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Durg, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Municipal Corporation Through Commissioner, Tahsil And, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. B.P. Sharma, Advocate along with Mr. M.L. Sakat, Advocate For respective respondents : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Government Advocate and Mr. Sandeep Dubey, 2 Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 10.07.2026 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s): “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned notice dated 08.03.2022 (Annexure P/1), issued by respondent No. 3. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct the Municipal Corporation, Durg to close the proceedings initiated against the petitioner in order to penalize him. 10.3 Any other relief, deemed fit in the present facts and circumstances of this case may also be awarded to the petitioner.” 3. Mr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that respondent No.1 to 4, in return, categorically stated that no action is being taken against the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner wants to withdraw this petition with liberty to revive his prayer, if cause of action exists in near future. 4. No objection from other side. 5. Permission is granted. 6. With the liberty as prayed for, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE Rekha