1 CGHC010330582026 2026:CGHC:38053 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4399 of 2026 Mangalchand Devangan S/o Late Lagan Sai, Aged About 55 Years R/o Ward No. 24, Near Arya Shishu Vidya, Mandir, Budhwari, Korba District Korba C. G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Urban Administration And Development Department Mahanadi Bhawan Nava Raipur District Raipur C. G. 2 - Nagar Palika Nigam Korba Through Commissioner, District Korba C. G. 3 - Sunit Gupta Zone Commissioner Kosabadi, Zone, Nagar Palika Nigam Korba, District Korba C. G. 4 - Manish Mishra, Employee Nagar Nigam Korba Kosa, Badi, Zone, Korba, District Korba C. G. ... Respondents] (Cause title taken from CIS System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Patel, Advocate For Respondents/State : Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, Dy. A.G. For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Saumitra Kesharwani, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Abhishek Gupta, Advocate Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25/08/2026 Digitally signed by AMIT PATEL 2 1. The petitioner has filed this petition with the following reliefs:- “ 10.1. It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned notice issued against the petitioner. 10.2. It is further prayed that the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to conduct proper survey and demarcation of the property in question. 10.3 It is further prayed that the respondent authorities may kindly be directed not to take any further coercive action against the petitioner without following due process of law. 10.4 It is further prayed that the respondent authorities may kindly be directed to restore the staircase and wall damaged on 15.07.2026, or pay appropriate compensation for the damage caused. 10.5 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner. ” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that vide notice dated 03.07.2026, issued by the respondent-Nagar Palik Nigam, Kosabadi Zone, Korba, the petitioner was directed to remove the extra construction raised by him, as the same was causing obstruction to the vehicular activity and, therefore, he was directed to remove the said construction within 24 hours. It is further submitted that pursuant to the aforesaid notice, the petitioner has approached this Court today, i.e., 25.08.2026, seeking urgency in the matter and protection against the proposed action of the respondent authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the aforesaid notice and apprehends that the extra construction raised by him 3 may be removed by the respondent-authority without affording him an adequate opportunity of hearing. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation, Korba, submits that a notice was initially issued to the petitioner, pursuant to which he submitted his reply on 08.07.2026. The said reply was duly considered by the competent authority and thereafter, vide order dated 13.07.2026, the petitioner was directed to remove the encroachment and additional construction raised by him. It is further submitted that the said action has been taken in accordance with law and in the larger public interest, as the encroachment is obstructing the public lane and causing inconvenience to the general public. The removal is necessary to maintain law and order and to facilitate free and peaceful movement of the public through the said passage. Hence, no interference is warranted in the impugned action. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ought to have been given an opportunity of hearing before passing the order. It is submitted that the order was passed without hearing the petitioner, which is contrary to the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the petitioner submits that the said order suffers from illegality and may kindly be set aside or appropriate directions may be issued in accordance with law. 4 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Directions in the Matter of Demolition of Structures, In re, (2025) 5 SCC 1, held in paragraph 94.1 to 94.10, which reads as under:- “94.1. No demolition should be carried out without a prior show-cause notice returnable either in accordance with the time provided by the local municipal laws or within 15 days' time from the date of service of such notice, whichever is later. 94.2. The notice shall be served upon the owner/occupier by a registered post A.D. Additionally, the notice shall also be affixed conspicuously on the outer portion of the structure in question. 94.3. The time of 15 days, stated herein above, shall start from the date of receipt of the said notice. 94.4. To prevent any allegation of backdating, we direct that as soon as the show-cause notice is duly served, intimation thereof shall be sent to the office of Collector/District Magistrate of the district digitally by email and an auto generated reply acknowledging receipt of the mail should also be issued from the office of the Collector/District Magistrate. The Collector/DM shall designate a Nodal Officer and also assign an email address and communicate the same to all the municipal and other authorities in charge of building regulations and demolition within one month from today. 94.5. The notice shall contain the details regarding: (a) The nature of the unauthorised construction. (b) The details of the specific violation and the grounds of demolition. 5 (c) A list of documents that the noticee is required to furnish along with his reply. (d) The notice should also specify the date on which the personal hearing is fixed and the designated authority before whom the hearing will take place. 94.6. Every municipal/local authority shall assign a designated digital portal, within 3 months from today wherein details regarding service/pasting of the notice, the reply, the show-cause notice and the order passed thereon would be available. 94.7. The designated authority shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the person concerned. 94.8. The minutes of such a hearing shall also be recorded. 94.9. Upon hearing, the designated authority shall pass a final order. 94.10. The final order shall contain: (a) The contentions of the noticee, and if the designated authority disagrees with the same, the reasons thereof. (b) As to whether the unauthorised construction is compoundable, if it is not so, the reasons therefor. (c) If the designated authority finds that only part of the construction is unauthorised/non- compoundable, then the details thereof. (d) As to why the extreme step of demolition is the only option available and other options like compounding and demolishing only part of the property are not available. 6 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon consideration of the submissions advanced, as well as the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the concerned authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. If the construction raised by the petitioner is found to be causing obstruction to the lane, the competent authority shall be at liberty to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law; however, the same shall be done only after affording the petitioner due opportunity of hearing. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge AMIT PATEL