c^ ^^ BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR(C.G.) WRIT PETITION (CtNO. Lf^i / 2009, PETITIONERS A^ ^ ..^'^' ..• ..^ / ^/•&/ <^:;' ^ ^" ^) ^ 1. Shri Surendra Singhai S/o. Shri N. R. Singhai, aged about- 48 years, R/o. Mouse No. A-11, Rawat Residency, Village Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 2. Shri Suresh Kumar Goyal S/o. late Shri Kerta Ram Goyal, aged ahout- 43 years, R/o. House No. C-16, Rawat Residency, Village Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3. Shri Vijay Goyal S/o. late Shri Kerta Ram, aged about- 40 years, R/o. House No. A-10, Rawat Residency, Vitlage Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 4. Shri Abhay Tiwari S/o. Shri R.A. Tiwari, aged about- 37 years, R/o. h4ouse Nc. C-18, Rawat Residency, Village Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5. Shri Girish Prakash Vishwakarma S/o. late Shri Suraj Prasad Vishwakarma, aged about- 55 years, R/o. House No. C-19, Rawat Residency, Village •ni "";.:'• ;?!;../! t'il''. ^•.•- .;-'.l.^ 11 nw.:i:s :l1i;:-HJ; :'-^' JilJI l:.i^ l;11. ^lfi^ ;t::stt;gi ;!liU IIS :l.lg ;';l;:i : i 111 ;'! ^"^ RESPONDENTS ^^••-•.•^•,^, ,^! . -^ ?^ 1^4^/C;^'l 1 :j^i^r"i w^^ ^—^.^'"^ ^€{'"\^ !ifsy Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 6. Smt. SarQj Agrawal W/o. Shri Naresh KumarAgrawal, aged about- 40 years, R/o. hlouse No. C-17, Rawat Residency, Village Bhagwanpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS r' 1. State ofChhattisgarh.through Secretary, Department ofRev^nue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur 2. 'The Collector, Surguja, District- Surguja (C.G.) 3. The Sub Divisional Magistrate (Revenue), Ambikapur, District- Surguja (C.G.) 4. Tahsildar, Ambikapur,District- Surguja (C.G.) WRITPETITIONUNDERARTICLES2260FTHECONSITUTION OFINDIA. w^ v'9 imm '^•^ "m, ji.'..: I. l:H:i il ii:';1i: ;;,.li.i..^ Jl: rn.il M M\ HIGH CQURT QF CJHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.4581 OF 2009 PETITIONERS Shri Surendra Singhai & Others RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others y^lNNNC, (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Saurabh Dangi, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 23rd day of August, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the State submits that there is neither proposal for demolition of the structure in question nor any intention on the part of the respondent authorities to take action against the petitioners, however, if it is decided in future, after having found some irregularity or illegality, proper show cause notice, before taking any action, shall be issued to the petitioners. ^3. In view of the above, according to the learned counsel appearingfor the petitioners nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge