^.s^w^ -^ •9asa CTS&T^ ^v ^' HIGH COIJRT OF CHHATTISGAR.H AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 3290 of2009 Manharaa Lal Kaiwart S/o Late Shri Millu Ram Kaiwart, Aged about 34 vea.rs. vill. Linaiadih, Durga Nasar, Bilaspur C.G. VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, RESPONDENTS Deveiopment, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur. 2. Collector, Bilaspur. 3. Municipai Corporation, Bilaspur, Througb the WRIT PETn'ION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSITlUnON OF INDIA \ Shri' Utkarsh Verma, Advocate tbr the petitioner. Shri Alok. BaksU, Govenmient Advocate for thc State./ >hi-i Sudeep Agi'awaS, Advocate for tlie respoadent No. 3. ^th (Passed on 15B1 day of July, 2009) 1. Shri Utkarsh Venna, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner land in was a! bearing Survey No to the uncle of petitioner nameiy Derha. 'Fhe petitionei- has been living in the said premises alongwith Derha, his uacle, and as such, the petitioner is in occupation ofthe respondeat-Corporation has initiated process to demolish tiie house situated over the land in dispute without affordiiig an opportunity of £? ..;'^i32£^ ...yaifi ^ €. ~^ "^ "~£ess^ 1 *:-^y f 2. €^ %) »hri A No. 3- irlv an opportunity to put forward his case before any steps is taken. He submits that appropriate notice shali be given to the petitioner forward his case. In that event according to Shri Verma, 1he petitioner shall file reply on or before •21st July, 2009 aud appear on tfae 22'1'1 July, 2009 the competent authoritv i.e. ttie Commissioner, 4. The Commissioner. Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur is directed to consider the reply of the pet.itioD.er and aft.er affording him an opportunity to put forward his case, appropriate orders may be passed in accordance wit3i law, on its own merits. Till then, there shal! be no dsmolition before the exercise ofhearing ofthe petitioner and passine Accordingly, the petition stands disposedof. Sd/- SattebK.AS"itlow Judge