c ?.\" ( ^'" IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR, CHHATTISGARH Writ Petition Npo? ^5of 2006 PETITIONER: RESPONDENTS: <^y^ ^i^ ^^Q^ Versus ^- 2. / / 3. ,4, / 5. Smt. Neelam Agrawal, W/o Bal Krishna Agrawal, Aged about 35 years, Occupation; Business, R/o 24, Doongaji Colony, Raipur, Chhatdsgarh, State of Chhatdsgarh, Through the Secretory, Department of Housiag and Environinent, D.K.S. Bhawaa, Maatralaya, Raipur, Chhatdsgarh. CoUector, CoBectorate, Raipur, District: Raipur, Chhatdsgarh. Director, Town & Countiy Plaiuung, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Municipal Corporation, Raipur, Through its Coin-missioner, Corporate Biuldiag, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Tehsildar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CON8TITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OP APPROPRIATE WRIT/WRITS. DIRECTIONS ETC.. IN THE NATURB OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI AND/OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OF UKE NATURE 3'Il^iqiT R-fi+sn^r sbiitxiRn ^ 3sr •^WM^, w^ww, Rciiuy 3liq?l M?|t»» *<i*(wrsn*<itn 200^ R'b«^ Sfl^l 8'KIIW<rf?(T »i<iffi<f)-itii*<?iTfffe><fl <ISf+di< ^si^Tan^ST A4r. Rajeev Shrivastav4 counsel for the petitioner-. Mr. Sumesh Baj<y, Qov^rnment Advocate for* the State/respondents No.l, 2, 3 & 5. Mr. H.B. Agr-smfat, Seni^r Advocate for respondent .4. Hewd on I.A.No.5856^2006, application for amendment, as we!i as on admission. The petitioner has ftle|d this writ petition under* Ari-icle 226/227 of the Constitution of India, wittj a prcyer- to quash the order doted 24-4-2(X)6 (Annexure P-6) and hotd tl^e some as void and inoperstive, and the r'sspondents be restrained frc^m demolishing the bujlding of the petitioner. The case of the petiticjner is that the petitioner is ownef of the iand and building situated at |3sr'a Nos.221/10 aid 221/14, Patwari Halka No.105, Village: Mothpuraina, |itetrict! Raipur and there 'is a buiiding standing on that land. The building wa^ constructed in the year 1989 for the purpose of running a school named ar(d sty!ed as Cambridge Public School ond the school was in operation till 19f8. Thereafter, the building has been 9Jven on rent to a private University namely, 6.H. Raisoni Inter'national University. However, due to the poiiti^al vendetta towards the husbond of the petitioner namely, Bat Krishn<|i Agrawai, tvithout taking recourse of iaw, the Qfficers of respondent N<(.4 started thr-eatening the petitioner for demolition of the building. ^pprehending ille9al action of the respondents, W.P.No.3048/2005 was filed Ibefore this Court md vide order doted 24-8- 2005 this Court disposed |of the writ petition while observing that ('M^fef^) XI-HC-22 sn^TW (^•iNiS^T snfrosfer ^. *<w<iiTts*n^ 3^ -<tiw<, arflu'KS, Rioi«y 3ii^i Ma<ft 200^ f^6% respondent No.4 herein is not Depcrtment for demarcation of petitioner, in presence of both 't^ie pcrties, in occordance with law. However, the respondents have started situated at Villa9e; Mathpursina' the respondents is arbitrary. i order on 11-7-2005 stating tl^erein that the petitioner hss encroached 10,100 sq. mts. of isnd. W.P. herein and same was disposed. of on 24-8-2005. Misreoding notice to the petitioner on 21- petitioner sought some tfme -t petitionar. On 9-6-2006, the pubtished in Desh Bandhu, Raipui behalf of respondent No.4 ir| land of Corporation bearin9 Kh and 40 x 140 mts. the petitione <»>l<l?Ct<fl-l111CTl^'fel<;l <R|«^K Stia.ri^ffsnSsr preciuded from approaching the Kevenu® the lond of respondent Na.4 as wiell as the lemolition of the buiiding of the petitioner at about 5 p.m. on 9-6-2006. The action of Aunicipai Corporation, Raipur has passed an 'Ai.1867/2005 was filed by the petitioner of with a direction that the respondents should not remove the buildir^ or structure of the petitioner without fotlowin9 the due process of 14". Thereafter, the petitioner filed a writ petition, which wixs registered a^ W.P.No.3048/2005 and same was disposed |the said order, respondent No.5 issued a (3-2006 for demarcation of the land. The fp reply and no notice was served on the petitioner came to know from the news ', that the building of the patitioner is to be demolished. In the reply to the insljant writ petition, return hos been filed on which it hcs been submitted that the Detitioner filed W.P.No.1867/2005 and in which it was submitted that on the sra No.221/01 admecsuring 225 x 20 mts. has encroached 10,100 sq. mts. of land. It wos complained by the petil|ioner that without foflowing estabiished Cfl^^^) XI-HC-22 3n^r?f>r fiawsn^r sRflWBfeT 3^ -•<i<<ici<i, ®Tntf'i<o,Rtciitiy 3ll^| M51<t» ^.<p.^ IIICTI snil<*> R'b^, W]; 200& •ni<<I<i<fl-t Kit«iT^"tec^<Ri*<;i< ^isri^iiTsn^T procedure of law and on the grounjJ of politicai vendetta, the demolition is goin9 to be made, therefore, t^espondent No.4 has taken steps for demarcation of land which was also challenged by W.P.No.3048/2005 according to which it was made cl^ar that Annexure P-9 was quoshed and respondent No.4 wos not prec|uded from approaching the Revenue Depdrtment for demorcation of lai|id of respondent No.4 as well as of the petitioner in presence of both th4 porties. Copies of orders dated 11-4- 2005 & 24-8-2005 are Annexures 1^-4-1 & R-4-2, respectively. Accordingly, notice of demarcation to the petitjjsner and respondent No.4 was issued and the copy of notice is Annexure R-f-3. Therefore, after following due and estdiblished procedure of \CM, de^narcation report was obtained, copy of which \s Annexure R-4-4 with map ^nd Khasra. Two notices dated 1-5-2006 with postai receipt and 8-6-2006 w/ps issued to the petitioner by officials of r-espondent No.4. Permission was s^ught for on 8-6-2006 by the Collector & District Magistrate, Raipur for a i|lat2 o-f 9-6-2006 ond 10-6-2006 by the Commissioner. The work was njit completed, therefore, one day was extended up to 11-6-2006. In the amendment applicati4n (I.A.No.5858/2006) fited on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner nouij seeks to amend pdr-a 5.8 whereby the petitioner wants to incorporate th^t the land was purchased by the husband of the petltioner and in para 5.10 ^he wants to incor'porste that in the year 1979 as per •the infor'mation of th^ petitioner some of the lands of Village; Mathpur'aina was allotted to Munic^ipal Corporation, Raipur for constructing trenching ground, and when the la(id was allotted to Municipal Corporation, (<fl^y^r) XI-HC-22 3^''<11<IIW<1, SiTfl'M'16, Rdltiy 3ll^l ^l^ch . tJ.P.2-73^-7 *l|t1WI!»HI«»»"""••••••••••"• YW( 200 RI<)<A 3I1^T?iT ^•(Nian^T sbHlcb^fer <tii<ilyi<fl-i ii*i<nTfftetfl'<Riw< ^isri^iran^T Rdipur, according to the informijrtion of the petitioner, Cotlector, Rajpur vide its order doted 8-3-1979 beorii the petitioner to Municipal Coi defflarcation exercise also took effort was made for shiftinql Municipal Corporation, Raipur, f^ Therefore, allotment of to respondent No.4 has been e; petitioner herself. The questii encroached upon the lond of Raipur, which wcs allotted to A^ of W.P.No.3048/2005 filed observed thirt "it is made cleail from approaching the Revenue r-esoondent No.4 as well as of t| in accordance with law, and to appears thot therecfter, r'espo[ Tehsildar* gwe notice to the p| petitioner. From the proceedii 3-2036, TTie Tehsildar- on th4 case and issued notice to the demsrcation of the land and present. On 29-3-2006, one petitioner and requested for (^c •^ Nazul No.306/79 allotted adjoinin9 land of ^poration, Raipur as trenching ground. The ^lace in the year 1994. In the year 1997, an disry on the land, which was allotted to >r the purpose of trenching ground. land, adjoining to the iand of the petitioner, jtablished cs per the averments made by the >n remains as .to whether the petitioner has [r'espondent Nto.4 i.e. Municipol Cor'poration, ]unicipal Corpor'ation, Raipur. While disposing ^sy the petitioner, on 24-8-2005, it was that that reapondent No.4 is not precluded Department for- demarcation of the lond of »epetitioner in presence of both the parties, |ake further steps, in accordance with !ow. It ident No.4 approached the Tehsildar and the rtitioner for demarcation of the land of the ^g, it oppesrs that first day wos fixed as 21- request of respondent No.4 registered the idrties to remain present on 29-3-2006 for Halka Patwar'is were also asked to remain Santosh AyoMd appeoreo' on behalf of the Jjournment, as the petitioner is said to have (^^fe^) XI-HC-22 HIHCTI sn*<icn 3^ '<<NIC1'l|, ©Tn^'IS,Rlc1lti^< 3ii^yi <4ach —.V>.:T:.2r7.3s:l_ -_./ V^ 20C R<)<A StI^TW R-fi+a'n^r sn*<i<ti ylea Sf<l<tl sn^TTOtTWnfer ^ 'stiiqtCT'fl-i *iit«'tTffte^t'<Rit<;i< ^sri^iTsn^r 1. j6ne to Delhi for takirg treatm ;nt, on which next date for demorcation was fixed as 24-4-2006. On that d^y also, Sontosh Agrawal ogain appeared and requested for fur-ther adjourn|nent, on which the Tehsildar pr'epored the demcrcation report and the Mu(iicipai Corporation submitted its report that there is encr'oachment on the| land admeasuring 10,100 sq. mts. by the petitioner. Therefore, in view of involved in tiiis matter. The pe" structure is stonding belongs claims that the iand belongs settled in this writ jur'isdicti addueed by both the parties in the petition is iiable to be di fhe aboye facts, there are disputed focts itioner is claiming thct the land on which the ^o her, whereas, the Municipal Corporation jo them, as such, disputed facts cannot be fpn, and the same require evidence to be iupport of their claim. In the circumstances, smissed on this ground only. Hence, this application for amendment (^.A.No.5858/2006) \s unnecessary for the reason thot even the writ pe ition invoives disputed facts, which 'is not maintainable. Therefore, the c^plication for amendment as well as the writ \ pe1:Won<S^t3ismissed on the gri( writ petition, which require deti^ The petitioner, if so 1)1 redressal of her grievances. petitioner, seven days' time ^! approach the Civil Court, if 34 >und that disputed focts are involved in this riled enquiry. idvised, may opproach the Civil Court for On the request of learned counsel for the rom todoy is allowed to fhe petitioner to advised, and from today, the respondents should not proceed with any d4molition for the next seven days. The stay granted earlier stands vacated. ((i^^fet) XI-HC-22 31I^T?iT ^•ITOain^iT a'xl'n uRfl ISW^ *«: Somo 'r a> ^ A :SSI -<4|<<|CI<1, »Tf|<1'|6, Rldiy^ 3ii^i <^ach &,<F,2<?5-. 11*1(11 s»*<i<n Wj; 200^ Ri't>«^ sii^i ^wiwflfer -fc< The writ petition as No.5858/2006) stand dismisse Parties are entitled for also the appiication for amendment (I.A. ;y. No order as to costs. sertified copy of this order. °bi<<tci41-i iwnTffte^l'<Ri«;i< ^sil^iran^r Sd/- L.C-Bhadoo Judge (ifi^y^)