HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT B!LASPUR Writ Petmon (C) No. 859 of2003 . Moolchand Sahu son of Anand Ram, aged about 35 2. Ab‘iul Azlz son of abdul RAhman, aged about 38 years 9’ Kalim Khan, sou of Aziz Khm, aged about 36 years. ‘ Rounaq All son of Stkandar Ah aged about 38 yeaxs Saleem Khan, son ofAZIZ Khan, aged about 38 years mwnmmag ym Abdul Latxf, son of Abdul A21z Khan, aged about 35 ; years'. N¢M§ Awdwh Kumar Tlwan son of Han Tlwan, aged about 45 years Baku Abbas son of Haider Abbas Rizvi, aged about °°. - 35 years 9. Ku Shaman Fatima, daughter of All Imam, agod 10 Mohd Sarfaraz son of Abdul Sattar aged about 37 11 Rayeev Shnvas§ son of Ram Ratan Snvas, aged about 12 Bhavesh Gmkwad, son of Shn Ashok Gaikwad, aged 13 Mukesh Kumar Sahu, son of Daulat Sahu, aged about 14 Imarruddm, son ofAmsuddm, aged about 35 yems about 36 years s years 38 years about 38 years 38 years 15 Dllip Kumar, son of Shyam Sundar aged about 46 years . 16.Wa]i Mohd. Son of Shaikh Chhom, aged about 40 years. l7.Goverd1mn Lal Sahu, son of Indmmn, aged about 35 years. 18 Mohd Saling- son of Mohd. Ayub aged about 38 yams '19 Iqbal Memon @ Yunush, son of Aboobakar Slddlque, All ean'ymg on the busmess m Talon Maxket, GE Road Raj Kumar College Ward, Ralpur VERSUQ l State of Chhamsgarh through the Secretary Mmlstry of Town & Country Planmng, Secretanat, DKS Bhawan, Rmpur The Collector/Nazul Odicer, Colleetomte, Ralpm. aged about 39 years PP) wsmwmmoommogwman @resernt : Shn B P Shanna, Advocate for the petxtnoner Raipur Municipal. Corporation, a'body corporate oonstituted under the relevant provisions of Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 havmg Its otiiee at Malvrya Road, Raipur through Its Comimssroner, Raipur Mummpal Corporation, Rarpur (WRIT PETITION UNDFR ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) Shn A S Kaehhwaha, Deputy Advocate General for the State Shn Pankaj Agrawal Advocate for the reisondent No 3 f. @ ORAL ORDER (Passed on 11m of February, 2008) 1. learned counsel appearmg for the petltwners subrmts that the fact and quesnon of law mvolved m the present Wm Petmon are the same tn that of in Gurmukh Das and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and othem. Thus, this petition is squarely covered by the order dated 17. 1 1 .2007 paesed in Gurmnkh Das and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others (Supra). 2. Shn' Pankaj Agmwal, Ieamed counsel appearing for the respondent No. 3 I agees with the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and submits that the order in the same terms may be passed in this matter also that no steps for demolition of the structure, dispossession of the petitioners hom the shops/land in question shall be taken before aEording proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, in accordance with law. 3. It is ordered aecordingly. In View of the foregoing nothing survives in the matter; the petition is accordingly disposed of. No order asto costs. Sdl- Satxsh K Agmhotrr Judge i w l l sahu 4 1. v u »fV’ t -7. .