Co IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. (C) No. :,^3^ /2011 PETITIONER <?• «?•'J C.^' J.SI ^^ ^^^zy ..--;\^,:<^~'' ^^'^' ...•"%^'0^-?' RESPONDENTS Dr. Jeevat Ram Tulaswani, S/o Late Shri Atmaram Tulaswani, aged about 61 years, R/o Durga Niwas, Gali No. 5, Telibandha, Raipur (G.G.) and allotee of Shop No. 10 Nagar Palika Market, Old Police chowk Telibandha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS 1) State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Mantralaya, D.K.S Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2) Municipal Corporation Raipur, Through its Commissioner, Disfrict Raipur (C.G.) 3) ^Commissioner, Zone No. - 4, Municipal Corporation Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA •1k ^ ^^ PETITIONER HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : B ILASPU R WRIT PETITION (0 N0.2346 OF 2011 Dr. Jeevat Ram Tulaswani Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Wrjt Petition underArticle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri R. Pradhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate for the respondents No.2 & 3. ORDER ilfT Gowri (Passed on this 18"' day of October, 2011) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Grievance of the petitioner is that the impugned order has been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, though the land in dispute was tegally and duly allotted to the petitioner. Lean:ed counsel submits that ihe petitioner may be affordsd an opportunity of hearing, to put forward his case before taking the decision by the respondent authorities for demolition of the property in dispute. At this juncture, learned counset appearing for the respondent Corporation fairly submits thaf before taking any decision with regard to the property in dispute, proper opportunity of hearing will be afforded to the petitioner and thereafter, the order will be passed, in accordance with law and on its own merits. In view of the above, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. , Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge