1 CGHC010451752025 2026:CGHC:29531 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5545 of 2025 1 - Virendra Kumar Soni S/o Prabhu Lal Soni Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Sinapali, Tahsil Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector, Gariyaband District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 5 - Gram Panchayat Sinapali Through Sarpanch, Village Sinapali, Tahsil Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 6 - Rohit Patel Sarpanch, Village Sinapali, Tahsil Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh 7 - Secretary Gram Panchayat Sinapali, Tahsil Devbhog, District Gariyaband Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. S. Pradhan, Advocate For State : Mr. S. S. Choubey, G.A. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, Advocate ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13.07.2026 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “10.1. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the demolition notice dated 13.10.2025 (Annexure P/1) and also the quash the demolition proceeding initiated by the Respondent No.5. 10.2. That, any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the notice dated 13.10.2025 (Annexure P-1) issued by the Gram Panchayat, whereby the petitioner was directed to remove the alleged encroachment from the Government land i.e. school play ground on which the petitioner's residential house is situated. It is contended that the impugned notice is wholly without jurisdiction and without the authority of law. Learned counsel submits that the Gram Panchayat had no competence to issue notice or to initiate or undertake demolition proceedings in the absence of any order passed by the Tahsildar or any other competent revenue authority. It is further submitted that the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 56 of the 3 Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Act was not followed before issuing the impugned notice. Learned counsel further contends that, although the impugned notice granted to the petitioner seven days' time to remove the alleged encroachment, the respondent authorities proceeded to demolish the petitioner's house in an arbitrary and illegal manner, without adhering to the due process of law. It is, therefore, submitted that the demolition action is ex facie illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice, and contrary to the provisions of Section 56 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Act. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposes the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner and submits that the impugned notice has been issued by the competent authority strictly in accordance with the provisions of law. It is contended that no illegality, arbitrariness or procedural irregularity has been committed in issuing the notice or in the action taken pursuant thereto. It is, therefore, submitted that the present petition, being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents appended with the petition. 5. In the present case, the impugned notice dated 13.10.2025 has admittedly been issued by the Gram Panchayat through its Sarpanch. Prima facie, the Gram Panchayat is not the competent authority under law to issue such a notice for removal of 4 encroachment. Accordingly, the impugned notice dated 13.10.2025 is hereby quashed. 6. This Court is of the considered opinion that, if the petitioner is found to have encroached upon the Government land, particularly the school playground, it shall be open to the competent State authorities to initiate appropriate proceedings for removal of such encroachment. However, such proceedings shall be initiated only after issuance of a proper notice by the competent authority. Thereafter, the petitioner shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the competent authority shall proceed strictly in accordance with law. If, upon such consideration, it is found that the petitioner has unauthorizedly encroached upon the land in question, it shall be open to the competent authority to take appropriate action in accordance with law. Accordingly, liberty is reserved in favour of the competent respondent authorities to issue a fresh notice/order and proceed in the matter in accordance with law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case 7. Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observation(s) and direction(s). Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena