1 CGHC010327062024 2026:CGHC:40224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4909 of 2024 1 - Yogeshwar Prasad Dubey S/o Late Shri Shiv Prasad Dubey Aged About 78 Years Sai Nagar Jail Road In Front Of Krishna Apartment Ganj, District - Raipur (C.G.) --- Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh The Collector Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Sub - Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 4 - The Zone Commissioner Zon No. 2, Municipal Corporation Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) 5 - The Tahsildar Raipur District - Raipur (C.G.) 6 - R.B. Singh S/o Brijlal Singh R/o B- 13 House No. 1205 Lic Colony, Mowa, District - Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Vijay Patnayak S/o Jagannath Patnayak R/o Plot No A - 11 House No. 1183/ 12 , Lic Colony , Mowa, District - Raipur (C.G.) 8 - Sumit Khandelwal S/o Govind Khandelwal R/o House No. 1214, Lic Colony Mowa District - Raipur (C.G.) RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU Date: 2026.09.21 18:24:37 +0530 2 9 - Prakash Nagdev S/o Anil Kumar Nagdev R/o House No.2506/10 Lic Colony, Mowa District - Raipur (C.G.) 10 - Pankaj Mishra S/o V.B. Mishra R/o Plot No. A/5, Lic Colony Mowa District - Raipur (C.G.) --- Respondents WPC No. 6016 of 2024 1 - Smt. Bharti Sharma Wd/o Late Shri Shyam Kumar Sharma Aged About 63 Years R/o Sadar Bazar, Champa, Tahsil - Champa, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Zone Commissioner Zone No. 2, Municipal Corporation, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Tahsildar Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 6 - R.B. Singh S/o Brijlal Singh R/o B - 13 House No. 1205, Lic Colony, Mowa Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 7 - Vijay Patnayak S/o Jagannath Patnayak R/o A - 11 House No. 1183/12, Lic Colony Mowa, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 8 - Sumit Khandelwal S/o Govind Khandelwal R/o House No.1214, Lic Colony Mowa, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 9 - Prakash Nagdev S/o Anil Kumar Nagdev R/o House No. 2206/10 Lic Colony, Mowa, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 10 - Pankaj Mishra S/o V.B. Mishra R/o Plot No. A-/5, Lic Colony, Mowa, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents (Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.) For Petitioners : Mr. Ramakant Pandey, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1, 3 & 5 : Mr. Anmol Sharma, P.L. For Respondents No. 2 & 4 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondents No. 6, 8, 9 & 10 : Mr. Lukesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/09/2026 1. Both these captioned writ petitions share a common background and involve the same issues, therefore, they were clubbed, heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. For the sake of convenience, Writ Petition (C) No. 4909 of 2024 is treated as the lead case for the purpose of disposing all the writ petitions. 3. The petitioner has preferred the instant petition seeking the following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records pertaining to the case from the respondent authorities. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No. 1 to decide the complaint/application filed by the petitioner (Annexure P/6), within stipulated time, in accordance with law. 10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby directing the 4 respondent authorities to ensure that the petitioner’s right over his property may kindly be violated. 10.4 To kindly grant any other relief which may be deem fit in the given facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 4. Brief facts of the case, as projected in this petition is that the petitioner purchased Plot No. A-12, Khasra No. 626/51, admeasuring 2400 sq. ft., situated at Azad Grih Nirman Society, LIC Colony, Raipur, by registered sale deed dated 17.07.1984, which was thereafter demarcated by the revenue authorities and possession was delivered to him. The said plot was mutated in the petitioner’s name in the revenue records vide order dated 20.11.2016, and the petitioner was subsequently granted building construction permission by the Zone Commissioner, Zone No. 2, Raipur, vide order dated 26.07.2019, which was renewed from time to time, besides payment of property tax to the Municipal Authorities. After obtaining the requisite permission, the petitioner, aged about 78 years, commenced construction of his house in May, 2021; however, respondents No. 5 to 10 repeatedly obstructed the construction and raised objections regarding the petitioner’s title and possession, pursuant to which the petitioner sought demarcation under Section 129 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959. Upon demarcation and submission of the report and panchnama, the Tahsildar, Raipur, vide order dated 5 12.08.2021, rejected the objections of the private respondents and concluded that the petitioner is the recorded owner of Khasra No. 626/51. Despite the said order, respondents No. 5 to 10 again obstructed the petitioner’s construction, compelling him to approach the police authorities, but no effective action was taken. The petitioner thereafter approached respondent No. 1 seeking appropriate action against respondents No. 5 to 10 and protection to enable him to peacefully construct and enjoy his property within the validity of the municipal permission, but no action has been taken by the concerned authorities, aggrieved by the same, the petitioner to filed the present petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the recorded and lawful owner of Khasra No. 626/51, having purchased the property through a registered sale deed, and despite the same, respondents No. 5 to 10 are illegally obstructing the petitioner from constructing and enjoying his property. It is further submitted that the petitioner, aged about 78 years, has already obtained requisite construction permission and has approached the police as well as respondent authorities for protection, but no effective action has been taken. He further submits that such inaction is arbitrary and illegal and infringes the petitioner’s right to peacefully enjoy his property under Article 300-A of the Constitution of India. Therefore, appropriate directions may kindly be issued to the respondent authorities to 6 take necessary action against the obstruction and provide protection to the petitioner for construction of his house. 6. Learned State counsel submits that the grievance of the petitioner primarily concerns the obstruction caused by private respondents and the pending representation before the competent authority. It is submitted that the petitioner’s construction permission was extended from time to time in accordance with law, and the competent authority may consider and decide the petitioner’s representation expeditiously in accordance with the applicable provisions. He next submits that the State is having no objection to appropriate directions being issued by this Court for consideration of the petitioner’s representation in accordance with law. 7. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 4 submits that the answering respondents are not contesting parties, as no specific relief has been sought against them. It is submitted that the petitioner was initially granted permission for construction of the house on 28.07.2019, which was subsequently extended on the petitioner’s application, with the validity of the sanctioned map being extended up to 26.07.2022 and thereafter for a further period of one year up to 26.07.2023. It is further submitted that, in view of the amendment to Section 300 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, the period of validity of such permission has been extended from two years to four years. The 7 petitioner’s grievance is primarily against respondent No. 1 concerning disposal of his pending representation, and appropriate action thereon may be taken by the competent authority in accordance with law. The answering respondents therefore have no specific role in the relief sought and reserve their right to file a detailed para-wise reply, if required. 8. Learned counsel for respondents No. 6, 8, 9 & 10 raises objection to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 9. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court has considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel appearing for the Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G.)/respondent Nos. 2 and 4, who have categorically submitted that construction permission has already been granted to the petitioner in respect of the land in question and that such permission has also been extended from time to time. In view thereof, there appears to be no legal impediment to the petitioner raising construction over his land merely on the basis of objections raised by third parties having no right or interest in the said property. Accordingly, in view of the stand taken by respondent Nos. 2 and 4, the objections raised by learned counsel for respondent Nos. 6, 8, 9 and 10 cannot be sustained. Consequently, WPC No. 4909 of 2024 is allowed. 10. So far as WPC No. 6016 of 2024 is concerned, the same is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the 8 Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G.), along with the relevant documents, whereupon the competent authority shall consider and decide the petitioner’s pending application dated 05.01.2024 for grant of construction permission over the land in question, strictly in accordance with law preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju