1 CGHC010057922021 2026:CGHC:34677 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1319 of 2021 1 - Rupeshwari Manikpuri, W/o Anil Manikpuri, Aged About 30 Years, 2 - Uttara Patre W/o Salikram Patre, Aged About 26 Years, 3 – B. Ishwar Rao, S/o B.Surya Rao Aged About 50 Years, 4 -G. Rama Rao W/o G. Venkat Rao, Aged About 41 Years, 5 - Sumitra Manikpuri W/o Manohar Manikpuri, Aged About 54 Years, 6 - Rajeshwari Yadav W/o Shiv Kumar Yadav Aged About 21 Years, 7 -Shakun Thakur W/o Dev Singh Aged About 57 Years, 8 - Sarita Yadav, W/o Pawan Kumar Yadav Aged About 31 Years, 9 - Rekha Singh W/o Santosh Lal, Aged About 50 Years, 10 - Gurmit Kaur W/o Narendra Singh Bhatia, Aged About 55 Years, 11 -Manju Bhatia, W/o Satpal Bhatia, Aged About 55 Years, 12 - Savita Verma W/o Ram Niwas Verma Aged About 45 Years, All R/o Harshringar Colony, R.K. Nagar, Bilaspur Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 13 -Jabina Begum W/o Mohd. Sharif Khan, Aged About 35 Years, 14 - Khusbhu Dewangan, W/o Shanker Dewangan, Aged About 30 Years, 15 - Pooja Dewangan, W/o Laxman, Aged About 32 Years, No.13 to 15 are R/o Birkona, Koni District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. GOURI MUDALIAR Digitally signed by GOURI MUDALIAR Date: 2026.08.13 11:34:43 +0530 2 3 - The Tahsildar, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents For Petitioners : Shri C.R. Sahu, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Bharat Lal Dembra, Advocate. For State/respondents No.1 & 3 : Ms. Shailja Shukla, G.A. For respondent No.2 : Shri Pranjal Shukla, Advocate. SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 06/08/2026 1. Petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 not to disturb the possession of the petitioners and secure their right to enjoy over property under the scheme as stated above by permanently allotting houses to the petitioners as per possession over the houses. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 not to take any action either to evict the petitioners from the houses or forcing them to left their house as they are living and allotted houses after following due process of law. 10.3 Any other relief, which may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 would submit that this writ petition is filed by the petitioners seeking relief that the petitioners may not be evicted from the house possessed by them. It is contention of learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the house which are possessed by the petitioners have been allotted to them and they have also filed the copy of the allotment letter in their 3 favour along with the covering memo. He also submits that in the above facts of the case, as the houses have already been allotted to the petitioners, they will not be forcefully evicted from the house possessed by them and nothing remains for adjudication in this writ petition. 3. On due consideration of submission of learned counsel for respondent No.2, this writ petition is disposed of in view of the submission made by learned counsel for respondent No.2 that the houses possessed by the petitioners have been allotted to them. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge gouri