1 CGHC010369522024 2026:CGHC:36692 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5371 of 2024 Balram Kashyap S/o Late J.L. Kashyap Aged About 54 Years R/o 50/489, Purani Basti, Rudra Chowk, Lakhe Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Raipur Municipal Corporation Through Its Commissioner, Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Directorate Nagar And Village Investment Through Joint Director, Town And Village Investement, Atal Nagar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Zone Commissioner Zone 7, Raipur Municipal Corporation, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Tehsildar Raipur Tehsil- Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Indian Oil Corporation Limited Through Divisional Retail Head, Raipur Divisional Office, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Indian Oil Bhavan, Rajiv Gandhi Marg, (Vip Road), Ravigram, Telibandha, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 7 - Neha Sponge Power Through Its Director Manoj Saraogi S/o Satyanarayan Saraogi House Manin Road Shankar Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.08.18 10:26:56 +0530 2 For State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer For Respondents No.2 and 4 : Mr. Bhuvneshwar Singh Rajput, Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 17.08.2026 1 By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in failing to take appropriate action against the alleged illegal and unauthorized construction of a petrol pump by respondent No.7 over land stated to be owned and recorded in the name of Raipur Municipal Corporation, despite repeated representations and complaints made by the petitioner before the competent authorities. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records pertaining to the case of the Petitioner. ii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction to Respondents more particularly to Respondent Authorities for the removal of illegal construction of the Petrol Pump over the land recorded in the name of Municipal Corporation Raipur. iii) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any appropriate writ/order/direction or Orders that this Hon'ble 3 Court may deem fit and proper and in the interest of justice. iv) That Cost of the Petition may be awarded to the Petitioner.” 2 Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the disputed land bearing Khasra Nos.353/13, 354/9, 355/9 and 386/5, situated at Village Raipur Khas, Patwari Halka No.62, Tahsil and District Raipur, had been acquired by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur in the year 1960 and the same is presently recorded in its name. It is submitted that respondent No.7, despite the aforesaid position, obtained development permission by allegedly suppressing the fact that the land formed part of the property of the Municipal Corporation and proceeded to construct a petrol pump thereon. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner and other persons had repeatedly brought the said illegality to the notice of the respondent authorities, pursuant to which the competent authority had directed respondent No.7 to maintain status quo and the building permission was also suspended; however, despite such orders and repeated representations, no effective action has been taken by the authorities and the construction has been permitted to continue. It is, therefore, contended that the continued inaction of the respondent authorities is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to law, warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. 4 3 Learned counsel appearing for the State as well as learned counsel appearing for the respective respondents, namely respondents No.2 and 4 and respondent No.6, jointly submit that the present petition is not maintainable on account of inherent defects and non-joinder of a necessary party. It is submitted that the petitioner seeks removal of the petrol pump allegedly constructed over the land claimed to be belonging to Raipur Municipal Corporation; however, the person in whose favour the licence/permission has been granted and who is operating the petrol pump has not been impleaded as a party to the present proceedings. It is further submitted that, in the absence of the concerned licence holder/owner of the petrol pump, no effective or binding order for removal of the construction can be passed behind his back. Learned counsel further submits that, according to the stand of the Municipal Corporation itself, the Corporation is not the title holder of the land in question under any registered sale deed, and therefore, the petitioner has failed to establish any enforceable legal right or locus to seek the relief prayed for in the present petition. It is, thus, contended that the petition suffers from non-joinder of a necessary party as well as absence of locus and, therefore, no adjudication on the merits of the alleged encroachment can effectively be undertaken in the present proceedings. 4 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5 5 Having considered the rival submissions, this Court finds that the petitioner seeks a direction for removal of the petrol pump on the premise that the same has been constructed over land belonging to the Municipal Corporation, but the person in whose favour the relevant licence/permission has been granted and who would be directly affected by any order of removal has not been impleaded as a party. Further, the question of title over the land in question is also disputed and the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate any independent legal right or locus warranting issuance of the relief sought for. 6 In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, and particularly in the absence of the necessary and directly affected party, no effective or conclusive adjudication with regard to the legality of the construction or the alleged encroachment can be made in the present proceedings. The petition, therefore, suffers from a fundamental defect and does not call for exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court. 7 Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. It is, however, made clear that this Court has not adjudicated upon the title or ownership of the land in question or the legality of the construction of the petrol pump on merits. No order as to costs. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh