1 2026:CGHC:16743 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2354 of 2021 Lalit Chandranahu S/o Late Shri Bhushanlal Chandranahu, Aged About 65 Years R/o Railway Station Marg, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Nazool Officer, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Municipality Office, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund (C.G.), Through The Chief Mincipal Officer Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. 6 - Vikas Chopda S/o Mulchand Chopda R/o Ward No. 20 Station Road Mahasamund District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Akash Pandey, Advocate For State-Respondent : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, GA For Respondent No.4 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Mr. Shubhank Tiwari, Advocate 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 10/04/2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :- "10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records form the possession of the respondents situated at District Mahasamund. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issued an appropriate writ and direct to the Respondent No.1 to 5 to decide the complaint of the petitioner made against the encroachment over the Government Nazul Land bearing Khasra No.1210 and further direct to authorities to remove the encroachment over the aforesaid land with stipulated time. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief/reliefs in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon’ble Court deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs of the petitioner.” 2. Brief facts of this case is that The petitioner, a resident of Ward No. 19 near Railway Station Marg, is aggrieved by the illegal encroachment and unauthorized construction carried out by Respondent No.6 on Government land reserved for a playground and public road, including a gully used by local residents. The encroachment has caused significant inconvenience to the petitioner and other residents. The 3 petitioner submitted multiple complaints before the authorities, including the Collector and Nazul Department. Enquiries conducted in 2015 and 2016 confirmed that the land in question is Government Abadi land and that the encroachment is illegal. Despite several directions issued by competent authorities, including the Collector, S.D.O. (Revenue), Deputy Collector, and Commissioner between 2017 and 2020, and issuance of notices to the concerned parties, no effective action has been taken to remove the encroachment. Repeated representations by the petitioner have remained unaddressed, and the illegal construction continues, compelling the petitioner to seek intervention through the present petition. Hence, this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the inaction of the part of the authorities for not removing encroachment over the government land shows that the authorities hand and gloves with the respondent and smakes malafied. He would further submit that the petitioner who has been using the land as Gully that is narrow passage is facing day to day problem due to the obstruction caused by the respondent No.6, which is violation of fundamental right and also right to move and use the public utilities. The inaction on the part of respondent authorities by not removing the obstruction and despite the fact that report has been given by the S.D.O. (Revenue) the land which is reserved for the public purpose is illegal and arbitrary. He would next submit that the illegal construction over the government land is not only morally wrong but it is an offence despite this fact the authorities 4 not showing any effort to remove illegal encroachment which shows that the authorities in hand and gloves with the respondent No.6. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No.4 would submit that the disputed question of facts are involved in the present case. He would further submit that the civil dispute is going on between the petitioner and the respondent No.6, therefore, the matter need to adjudicated before the Civil Court. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No.6 opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and would submit that the grounds raised by the Petitioner are not liable to be allowed, the ground raised is arbitrary, discriminatory and imaginary in nature. He would further submit that the Petitioner has raised his frivolous grievance before various authorities just to take chance so that if any of the authorities if acted upon his complaint, his intention will be fulfilled to harass the answering respondent and further to negotiate with him easily without any rhyme and reason. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. Considering the facts of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the parties. The relief as raised by petitioner seems to be exhibited and decided by the Municipal Council as well as the concerned Collector as such without entering into merits of the case, 5 the petitioner is directed to approach before the concerned Municipal Council by filing an appropriate application and the Municipal Council in turn is directed to see whether any encroachment has been made by the respondent No.6 and if any encroachment is found then, the Municipal Council is at liberty to pass appropriate order while removing the encroachment made by the respondent No.6. The Municipal Council is directed to give proper opportunity of hearing to the respondent No.6, and any order to be passed is required to be passed, after following due process of law. 8. The Municipal Council is also at liberty to approach before the concerned Collector, if during the inquiry, it is found that the land in question is Nazul land then the Chief Municipal Officer of Municipal Council, Mahasamund can take assistance of the Collector, while deciding the representation of the petitioner. 9. In view of the observations made herein above, the instant petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vasant