s/^e^''^,^ K'"*S.^' ";^'K :-r»^ WBBSBff C ^ /L^o^_ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH ATBIUASPUR W.P.(C)NO. i-7 3,2, fc / 2007 PETITIONERS ^€. -^e •••Lw:>W •^^^)- ~^>" RESPONDENTS Ashok Lunkad, S/o Shri Amar Chand Lunkad, Aged about 42 years, R/o Jain Mandir Road, Jagdalpur (C.G.) Smt. Anju Lunkad, W/o Shri Ashok Lunkad, Aged about 40 years, R/o Jain Mandir Road, Jagdalpur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh - Through the Secretary, Revenue Departenent, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 3. The Tahsildar, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 4. Nazul Officer, Nazul Department, Jagdalpur (C.G.) 5. The Deputy Director, Town and Country Planning, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 6. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) 7. The President, Kayasth Samaj, Jagdalpur, Distt. Bastar (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 QFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0 N0.7336 OF 2007 PETITIONERS Ashok Lunkad & Another RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh .& Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Vikash Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondent No.7. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 28th day ofJune,2010) 1. By this petition, the petitioners pray for setting aside the allotment of the nazul land to the Kayasth Samaj for construction of community hall and further a direction to the respondent authorities to spare 40 ft. wide approach road for the residents of Sun City Colony. 2. Shri Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that petitioners are the partners of the partnership firm namely; Prithvi Developers. The petitioners have built various types of houses as per different strata of the society in the Sun City Colony. The said colony comes within the limits of the Municipat Corporation. Adjacent to the land belonging to the petitioners, there is a nazul land of the State Government bearing nazul sheet No. 123. According to the petitioners, out of the said nazul land, 2200 sq.ft. land has been allotted to the Kayasth Samaj for construction of their community hall by the State Government without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and without doing the spot inspection by the revenue AF^ ^.6-0 ;:-^. "%. authorities. The said act of the respondent authorities is illegal, arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice. As per the circular of the State Government dated 29-9-1973 before allotting the land all the perspns residing in the nearby vicinity, have to be noticed and after settling their objections, if any, the land may be allotted by the State Government, but the same has not been in the case on hand. On the other hand, Shri Thakur, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, submits that on an application of the respondent No.7 filed before the Nazul Officer, Jagdalpur, notice of memorandum to generat public of Jagalpur was issued and invited objections from them, but no one has filed any objection. Thereafter, with the consent of the authorities concerned, the matter was referred to the State Government through the Collector. After considering all the documents and after following the due process of law, v'tde order dated 9-1-2007 the State Government allotted the land in question in favour of the respondent No.7 for construction of a community hall. Shri Thakur further submits that since the land ofthe petitioners is not adjacent to the land allotted to the respondent No.7, no specific notice to the petitioner is necessary. As per the contents of the circular, the notice is required to be issued to a next neighbour whose land touches the boundary of the land to be allotted. The site map (Annexure - R1/2) clearly shows that the land belonging to the petitioners is not at all adjacent to the land allotted to the respondent No.7. Thus, the petitioners are not entitled to any relief. 4. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. 5. It is evident that before allotting the land in question to the respondent No.7 the respondent authorities issued a notice to general public by inviting objections from them, but no objection has been raised by the general public. Thereafter, the matter was forwarded to the State Government through the District Collector. The State Government after considering all the aspects of the matter in its letter and spirit allotted the land in question in favour of the respondent No.7 for construction of community hall. The petitioners failed to prove their case. 6. The contention of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that all the persons who are residing in the nearby vicinity may be given personal notice is noticed to be rejected, as clause 3 of the circular dated 29-9-1973 (Annexure - P/10) clearly provides that the land owners whose land touches boundary of the land in dispute may be noticed and they may file objection thereafter and, as such, in the case on hand wherein there is a wide gap of about 450 sq.ft. between Sun City colony and the land allotted to the respondent No.7, the petitioners cannot claim specific notice for raising objection to the allotment of land to the respondent No.7. 7, For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Gowri