1 2026:CGHC:18502-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 96 of 2022 Manbhavan Singh Uike S/o Late Shri Lakhan Singh Aged About 37 Years R/o Ward No. 12, Nayapara, Churria,, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Nagariya Prashashan Mantralaya, Naya Raipur,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Rajya Shahri Vikas Abhikaran Chhattisgarh Atal Nagar, Through Its Secretary, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur,, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 4 - Nagar Panchayat, Chhuria Through Its CMO, Churria, Rajnandgaon, District: Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 5 - Smt. Rajkumari Sinha President Nagar Panchayat, Churria, Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title Taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Jitendra Gupta and Mr. Deepak Kumar, Advocates. For Respondent(s) No. 1&3 : Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Siddharth Dubey, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 22/04/2026 1. Heard Mr. Jitendra Gupta and Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate 2 General for the State/respondents No. 1 & 3, and Mr. Siddharth Dubey, learned counsel for the respondent No. 4. 2. By this petition under Section 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks for the following relief(s): “(i) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the land encroachment of survey no.477 situated at village Churria, Rajnandgaon, C.G. (ii) That, after perusal of record, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an order of dismantling the entire shopping complex which has been constructed upon the Road, which is for public use. (iii) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to command the respondent authorities to provide the record of Finances received from the State Government and State Bank of India. (iv) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to initiate the process of recovery from the respondent authorities for misappropriation of the Government Funds. (v) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be please initiate the proceedings in accordance with the provisions of Indian Penal Code against the Respondent Authorities for misappropriation of public money and also Civil proceedings may also be initiated against the Respondent authorities. (vi) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Court deems 昀椀t under the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted to the petitioner in public interest.” 3. The petitioner claims himself to be a farmer and a journalist involved in social service. According to the petitioner, the land bearing Survey No.477 area 5.91 acres situated at village Churria, Rajnandgaon, recorded as a road in the revenue records, which has been provided under Section 233 of the C.G Land Revenue Code, 1959 (for short, the 3 Code) and the rules made their under, which provides a record of all unoccupied land in the village, shall be prepared in 3 parts namely: PART-A: Showing land set apart for exercise of nistar rights PART-B: Showing lands available for disposal PART-C: Showing all lands other than those set apart for nistar or available for disposal. 4. According to Mr. Jitendra Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Part- A of the aforementioned rules includes all lands occupied by trees, forest, scrub, jungle, roads. Therefore, it is apparent that survey No.477 area 5.91 acres, recorded as a road cannot be provided as a land available for disposal or for any other purposes. Section 237, sub-clause (3) of the C.G Land Revenue Code, 1959 authorises the Collector to divert the purpose of unoccupied land only for the purpose of agriculture or abadi. The Respondent No.4, Nagar Panchayat, Churria, Rajnandgaon, moved an application before the Collector, Rajnandgaon, for allotting the land bearing survey No.477 area 5.91 acres for construction of a shopping complex which was registered as Case No.122B(Di昀昀-General)/2017-18, upon receiving such application by the Respondent No.4, the proceedings before the Collector commenced. In such proceeding, it has been admitted that the land bearing survey No.477 has been recorded as a road vide order dated 27.08.2019, the Collector Rajnandgaon, rejected the application 昀椀led by the Respondent No.3, relating to allotment and diversion of such survey number because of the fact that such land has been recorded as a road in the revenue records and cannot be diverted for any commercial purposes as per the provisions of the Code. Such rejection order dated 27.08.2019 has not been challenged in any appellate forum therefore, the same has attained 昀椀nality. Subsequent to 4 such proceedings before the Collector, work order was issued vide letter dated 05.10.2018, where the rejection order passed by the Collector has been ignored by the authorities and in spite of the fact that the Collector has denied the permission to construct such shopping complex over such land, the authorities in the 昀氀agrant manner have constructed the shop. Despite the rejection order dated 27.08.2019, the respondent No.4, the Nagar Panchayat Churria had obtained the 昀椀nancial aid from the respondent No.1 and incurred the loan from the State Bank of India of Rs.49 Lakhs each. The Respondent No.4 has got the 昀椀nances sanctioned from the State Government and has constructed the shopping complex comprising of 101 shops over the survey No.477, which are illegal, unauthorized and contrary to the provisions of Section 233 and 237 of the Code. The o昀케cials of the Nagar Panchayat, Churria, Rajnandgaon, have made various representations to the authorities regarding illegal encroachment on the survey No. 477 as also the misappropriation of funds. The said issue has further been published in news papers but no action has been taken till date. The land bearing survey No.477 is a road for public use and such illegal and unauthorized encroachment and construction upon such land is illegal and holds no sanction of law which is opposed to the public policy. 5. On the other hand, Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State/respondents No. 1 and 3 submits that this petition is without any substance, deserves to be dismissed, as the petitioner has failed to demonstrate any right, infringement of which a writ may be issued. Vide letter dated 22.01.2018, issued by the respondent No. 4/Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon to the Collector, District Rajnandgaon regarding allotment of land and handing over in advance wherein, it has been requested that, in the minutes of the 5 meeting held by the Hon'ble Member of Parliament on 17.12.2017, instructions have been given to make a proposal for a commercial complex in the Municipal Area, therefore, in compliance whereof, the land out of Khasra No. 477 (area 5.91 Acres), the vacant land 400 meters in length and 4 meters in width is required. On 22.09.2018, the concerned Tehsildar, Chhuriya, District Rajnandgaon sent a memo to the Collector, District Rajnandgaon regarding allotment of land and handing over in advance whereby, it has been informed that, the aforesaid land has been handed over to the Respondent No. 4 on 22.09.2018 by the Revenue Department in presence of the public of the Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya for the construction of the commercial complex. Thereafter, on 05.10.2018, the State Urban Development Agency, Chhattisgarh, Raipur has issued a letter to the Respondent No. 4 Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya whereby granting permission for construction of the 100 shops in commercial complex. Subsequently by the letter dated 05.03.2019, issued by the State Urban Development Agency, Chhattisgarh, Raipur to the Respondent No. 4 Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya, a permission has been granted for commencement of the work of the construction of the aforesaid commercial complex on the aforesaid land. After due sanction and due approval, the aforesaid has been allotted and subsequently, the aforesaid commercial complex containing 101 shops have been constructed under the Mukhyamantri Swavlamban Yojna and the distance of the aforesaid 100 shops constructed under the Mukhyamantri Swavlamban Yojna situated right side on Chhuriya-Kallu Banjari, main road, is about 17 meters from the Main Road. However, the distance of the earlier constructed shops by the Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya situated left side on Chhuriya-Kallu Banjari Main Road, is about 13 meters from the Main Road, therefore, in future, if the widening of the road on 6 Chhuriya-Chichola, Kallu Banjari Main Road is proposed, then the aforesaid newly constructed shops would not be a昀昀ected. Hence, this petition deserves to be dismissed being frivolous and without any substance. 6. Mr. Siddharth Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 submits that vide letter dated 22.01.2018 request was made to the Collector, Rajnandgaon to hand over possession in advance of 400- meter-long and 4-meter-wide piece of land (located on the right side of Chhuria-Banjari Road) out of khasra/survey number 477 having an area of 5.91 hectares situated at Village-Churriyakalan, Tehsil-Churriya, District-Rajnandgaon The above stated request was made as land was required by respondent No.4 to construct commercial complex consisting of shops under the welfare scheme i.e. Mukhya Mantri Swavalamban Yojna On 22.09.2018 a letter was addressed to the Collector, Rajnandngaon by the Tehsildar, Chhuriya conveying that advance possession has been handed over to the Sub-engineer/In-charge accountant of respondent No.4/Nagar Panchayat Chhuriya. A proposal was forwarded to State Urban Development Authority on 22.09.2018 by respondent No.4 to allot requisite funds to construct the commercial complex i.e. 50% of the funds were to be provided by SUDA for construction of the commercial complex as per applicable guidelines rest of the funds were to be arranged, by the local body itself. The above stated proposal received sanction vide letter dated 05.10.2018 subject to the terms and conditions laid down in the aforesaid letter. The above stated letter dated 05.10.2018 was addressed by the O昀케cer on Special Duty/OSD (Technical) SUDA to Chief Municipal O昀케cer, Nagar Panchayat Churriya. Thereafter, as a sequitur to the above stated events, a notice inviting tender was published on 24.12.2018 for construction of 7 commercial complex, work order was issued on 05.03.2019 for the same and the construction work was completed on 05.01.2022. After handing over advance possession on 22.01.2018 to respondent No. 4, the revenue proceedings for allotment of requisite land were going on, which ultimately culminated into order dated 27.08.2019 passed by the Collector, Raipur vide which the requisite land for construction of commercial complex under the subject scheme was refused to be allotted to respondent No.4 for the for the reason i.e. the land requested to be allotted is a part of survey number which is re昀氀ected in the relevant revenue record under the head of road therefore allotting, the same for construction of commercial complex under the subject scheme would be impermissible as the same would be in teeth with the directions of the Hon’ble Apex court and the Hon’ble High Court and as a sequitur allotment proceedings were closed. A request was also made by respondent No.4 to the Collector, District-Rajanandgaon vide its letter dated 17.03.2021 for reconsideration of order dated 27.08.2019. The aforesaid order dated 27.08.2019 was challenged in an appeal under section 44 of the Code, but the same was dismissed vide order dated 20.07.2023 passed by the Commissioner, Division-Durg and order of the Collector, District-Rajnandngaon dated 27.08.2019 was upheld. The existing land use map of the planning area Chhuriyakalan published under Section 157 of the Chhattisgarh Town and Country Planning Act, 1973 within which the survey number/khasra number 477 falls (out of which the requisite land for the construction of commercial complex under the subject scheme was requested to be allotted) exhibits that the width of the road on the above stated land should be 30 meters whereas the revenue records exhibit the width of the road on the above stated survey number is 40 meters. 8 7. Mr. Dubey further submits that from perusal of the spot inspection report annexed to the reply as Annexure "R-4/9" that 30 meters wide land is available for the purpose of road on the subject survey number/Khasra number after the construction of commercial complex thus the same is in consonance with the plan published under section 15 of the Act, 1973 and Section 16 of the Act, 1973. Construction of commercial complex post refusal to divert land for the subject scheme by the Collector, District-Rajnandgaon under section 237 sub-section (3) of the Code can be termed as irregularity but not illegality as Section 237 sub-section (3) of the Code permits diversion of land for public utility projects. Further, there is no misappropriation of funds at the hands of respondent No.4 as the funds received by respondent No.4 has been utilized for construction of commercial complex (which was completed on 05.01.2022) meant for the subject scheme which is aimed at public welfare. As far as pick and choose allotment of the shops of the commercial complex is concerned, no allotment has been done by the committee empowered to do the same i.e. committee headed by District Collector of District-Rajnandgaon not any physical position has been handed over to any person. As far as passing of resolution by the President-in-Council preparing list of persons who may be allowed to run shop on temporary basis is concerned the same does not amount to allotment of shops. Praying for relief of dismantling of the commercial complex comprising of shops meant for weaker sections of the society, at this juncture i.e. after its construction is over works against public interest rather than working in favor of the public interest reason being the weaker sections of the society would loose on opportunity of self-employment against for a period of 1-3 years till the same is constructed on other site. Hence, he prays for dismissal of this writ petition. 9 8. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and materials available on record. 9. The construction of the shops in question was completed way back on 05.01.2022 and this petition was 昀椀led on 26.06.2022. According to the petitioner, survey No.477 area 5.91 acres, upon which the construction has been raised, is a road. The fact of the matter remains that the construction has already been completed way back on 05.01.2022 and the petitioner did not take any steps at the initial stage when the authorities were planning and thereafter implemented the scheme. Now, at this stage, when the construction is over and the shops are being allotted to the needy people and despite the fact that su昀케cient space is left for the purpose of road, the attempt of the petitioner by 昀椀ling this petition appears to be with an oblique motive. The petitioner, except stating that he is an agriculturist and a journalist, has not stated anything about his credentials. The construction of the shops is under a welfare scheme of the State. The present petition appears to be speculative and lacking in bona 昀椀des. The petitioner has not disclosed as to what substantial loss is going to be caused either to him or to the public at large. As on date, 30 meters wide land is still available which can be utilized for the purpose of road. In the present case, the petitioner has failed to substantiate the allegations with cogent material and has sought sweeping reliefs without adequate foundation. 10. It is relevant to mention that it is the duty of this Court to ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive and oblique notice behind 昀椀ling of PIL. In order to preserve the purity and sanctity of the PIL, the Courts must encourage genuine and bona昀椀de PIL and e昀昀ectively discourage and curb the PIL 昀椀led for extraneous considerations. 10 11. The Courts should, prima facie, verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining a PIL. It is also well settled that the Courts before entertaining the PIL should ensure that the PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine public harm or public injury. The Court should also ensure that there is no personal gain, private motive or oblique motive behind 昀椀ling the public interest litigation. The Courts should ensure the jurisdiction in public interest is invoked for genuine purposes by persons who have bona 昀椀de credentials and who do not seek to espouse or pursue any extraneous object. Otherwise, the jurisdiction in public interest can become a source of misuse by private persons seeking to pursue their own vested interests. 12. A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, in the case of Gurmet Singh Soni v. State of U.P. and others : 2021 (5) ADJ 409, noticing the decision of the Apex Court in State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal & Ors., reported in 2010 AIR SCW 1029 and other judgments of the Apex Court on the issue, has dismissed the public interest litigation. 13. The Courts cannot allow its process to be abused for oblique purposes, as was observed by the Supreme Court Court in Ashok Kumar Pandey v. State of West Bengal, reported in (2004) 3 SCC 349. In Balwant Singh Chaufal (supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court had discussed the three stages of a PIL which has been discussed above. The Supreme Court, in Balwant Singh Chaufal (supra) states as to how this important jurisdiction, i.e., PIL has been abused at Para 143 by observing as under: “143. Unfortunately, of late, it has been noticed that such an important jurisdiction which has been carefully carved out, created and nurtured with great care and caution by the courts, is being blatantly abused by 昀椀ling some petitions with oblique motives. We think time has come when 11 genuine and bona 昀椀de public interest litigation must be encouraged whereas frivolous public interest litigation should be discouraged. In our considered opinion, we have to protect and preserve this important jurisdiction in the larger interest of the people of this country but we must take e昀昀ective steps to prevent and cure its abuse on the basis of monetary and non-monetary directions by the courts.” 14. The Supreme Court, in Holicow Pictures (P) Ltd. v. Prem Chand Mishra, reported in (2007) 14 SCC 281 which has relied Janata Dal v. H.S. Chowdhary, reported in (1992) 4 SCC 305, observed as under: “12. It is depressing to note that on account of such trumpery proceedings initiated before the courts, innumerable days are wasted, which time otherwise could have been spent for the disposal of cases of the genuine litigants. Though we spare no e昀昀orts in fostering and developing the laudable concept of PIL and extending our long arm of sympathy to the poor, the ignorant, the oppressed and the needy whose fundamental rights are infringed and violated and whose grievances go unnoticed, unrepresented and unheard; yet we cannot avoid but express our opinion that while genuine litigants with legitimate grievances relating to civil matters involving properties worth hundreds of millions of rupees and criminal cases in which persons sentenced to death facing gallows under untold agony and persons sentenced to life imprisonment and kept in incarceration for long years, persons su昀昀ering from undue delay in service matters—government or private, persons awaiting the disposal of cases wherein huge amounts of public revenue or unauthorised collection of tax amounts are locked up, detenu expecting their release from the detention orders, etc. etc. are all standing in a long serpentine queue for years with the fond hope of getting into the courts and having their grievances redressed, the busybodies, meddlesome interlopers, wayfarers or o昀케cious interveners having absolutely no public interest except for personal gain or private pro昀椀t either of themselves or as a proxy of others or for any other extraneous motivation or for glare of publicity, break the queue mu昀케ng their faces by wearing the mask of public interest litigation and get into the courts by 昀椀ling vexatious and frivolous petitions and thus criminally waste the valuable time of the courts and as a result of which the queue standing outside the doors of the courts never moves, which piquant situation creates frustration in the minds of the genuine litigants and resultantly they lose faith in the administration of our judicial system.” 15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Gurpal Singh v. State of Punjab & Others , reported in (2005) 5 SCC 136, the appointment of the appellant 12 as Auction Recorder was challenged. The Court held that the scope of entertaining a petition styled as a public interest litigation and locus standi of the petitioner particularly in matters involving service of an employee has been examined by this Court in various cases. The Court observed that before entertaining the petition, the Court must be satis昀椀ed about (a) the credentials of the applicant; (b) the prima facie correctness or nature of information given by him; (c) the information being not vague and inde昀椀nite. The information should show gravity and seriousness involved. The court has to strike balance between two con昀氀icting interests; (i) nobody should be allowed to indulge in wild and reckless allegations besmirching the character of others; and (ii) avoidance of public mischief and to avoid mischievous petitions seeking to assail, for oblique motives, justi昀椀able executive actions. 16. In the present case, we are not satis昀椀ed that this is a genuine petition 昀椀led in public interest so as to invoke the jurisdiction in the public interest under Article 226 of the Constitution. 17. The instant PIL is, accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Amit AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Digitally signed by AMIT KUMAR DUBEY Date: 2026.04.23 15:04:36 +0530