, '^,..toy^ i'-y HSGH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BILASPUR W. P.No. 354 of 2001 Petitsoners 1. 2. Versus Respondents 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Laxmni Narayan Nema, son of Kailash Chandra Nema, age about 41 years, resident of 172, Arya Nagar, Durg, Tehsil and district Durg, C'Garh. Rama Kant Guptei, son of Mata Charan Gupta, aged about 33 years, resident of C/o Rama Studio, Tata Line camp ~ 2 Bhilai, Tehsil and dsstrict Durg, Chhattisgarh. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Pubiic Works Housing Board, /^tministration and Development Raipur, Chhattisgaiti. Director, Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Chhaffisgarh, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Deputy Director, Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh, Durg. District Durg, Chhattisgarh. Commjssioner, Municipal Corporation, BhHai, djstrict Durg, Chhattisgarh. Nazul OfFicer/Additionai Coilector, Durg, district Durg, Chhattisgarh. WRST PETITtON UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE COSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Shri Ashish Shrivasiava, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Vlnay Harit, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents No. 1,2, 3 and5. Shri H. B. Agarwat, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sangeeta Mishra. Advocate for the respondent No.4. ORALORDER (Passed on this l6thday of November, 2007) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, have executed lease deeds for getting shops in the commerciaj shopping complex "Chouhan Raza" at Shastri Nagar, Bhilai. constructed by one Shn Ajay Chouhan and his wife Smt. Durga Devi Chouhan. -z- ih. 2. tn this petition the petitsoners have prayed for settsng assde of the impugned order dated 16.2.2001 (Annexure P/5) passed by the Secretary to the Governmsnt of Chhattssgarh in Case No. 9/Sa/Nag.Prash./2000-01 (Shri Ashok Arya Vs. Shri Ashok Chouhan) and the tetler dated 3.3.2001 (Annexure P/S) issued by the Buiidjng Offjcer. Nagar PaSik Nigam, BhtSai to owner of the shopping comptex. 3. The petitioners have further prayed that the respondents be restrasned from taking any coercive steps or uslng force to demoiish the structure. 4. This Court on 20.3.2001 passed the interim order that until further orders the bulldings/shops in question of the petjtioners shati not be demolishec}. 5. Shri Vinay Harit, Searned Deputy Advocate GeneraS. appearing for the State/respondente No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 and Shri H. B. Agarwal, (eamed Senior counsel, appearing for the respondent No.4, fatriy submit ftat no steps for demoiitjon of the structure or dispossession of the petitioners from the shops/Sancls in questjon shalS be taken before affording proper opportunity of hearing to the petttioners, jn accordance wtti iaw and compliance ofthe impugnsd orders shalj not be insisted upon. 6. In view of the foresoing, nothing survives jn the matter. Accordsngly, this petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Thakur Judge