Allowed

State of Chhattisgarh and 4 Others v. Geetanjali Constructions (Colonizer Developer and Builder) and 2 Others

Chhattisgarh HC4 Nov 2009WA/330/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ appeal under the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006, the Division Bench examined whether the proviso to Section 2 precludes appeals against interlocutory orders. The court held that since the single judge passed an order virtually recording a conclusive finding that the impugned land did not meet the minimum 5000 sq. meter requirement, the absolute bar under the

What did the court decide?

The bar under Section 2(1) proviso of the Act is held not to apply; the writ appeal against the interim order is admitted.

State of Chhattisgarh and 4 Others Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2009)

¶1

,
'i,
.
r

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH^ATBILASPUR Lo A 5^330/03

¶3

Writ Appeal (_P._r) No.5409^of2009

¶4

APPELLANTS: 1. State of Chhattisgarh thrbugh
Respondents No.1 to5 Secretary, Department of Urban
Administration and Development,
Mamraiaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur
2. The Secretary, Government of
Chhattisgarh, Department of
Revenue, Mantralaya, DKS
Bhawan, Raipur
3. The Secretary, Govemment of
'
Chhattisgarh, Department of Urban
Administration and Development ,
Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur
4. The Secretary, Government of
Chhattisgarh, Department of Town
and Country Planning, Mantralaya,
DKS Bhawan, Raipur
The Sub-Divisional Offlcer,
Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶5

Versus

¶6

J ‘

¶7

RESPONDENTS: 1. Geetangali Constructions (Colonizer
Petitioner Developer and Buiider), A
Partnership Firm registered under
indian Partnership» Act, 1956,
through its Partner Sant Ram Sahu,
Sio Shri Mutan Ram Sahu, aged 53.
years, R/o Geetanjaii House, Nehru
Nagar, Ameri Road, Biiaspur (CG)
2. Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur
through Commissioner, Municipal
Corporation, Bilaspur
(Chhattisgarh)
(Respondent No.6)
Gram: Panchayat,‘ Mangia, through
its Secretary, Distt. Biiaspur
(Chhattisgarh)
(Respondent Nor?)
Present:
Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General with Shri Suryakant Mishra,
Panel Lawyer for the State/appeilants.

¶8

RESPONDENTS: 1.
Petitioner

¶9

Division Bench: Hon’ble^{ShriDhirendraMishra} & Hon’bie^{ShriR.N.Chandrakar,JJ.}

¶10

JUDGMENT

¶11

(4—11-2009)

¶12

1‘ This writ appeal^{islistedondefault.}

¶13

The appellants have preferred^{thiswritappealunderSection2(1)of} the Chhattisgarh^HighCourt (Appeal^{toDivisionBench)Act,2006(for} shod ‘the Act’) against^the interim order dated 7-8-2009 passed in WP(C) No.2724109 preferred^{byrespondentNo.1.}

¶14

3‘ Shri Vinay Harit,^{DeputyAdvocateGeneralappearingonbehalfofthe} appellants submitted^that proviso^{tosub-section} (1)^{ofSection2ofthe} Act does not^{createanabsolutebarto} prefer^{anappealtotheDivision} Bench against^{theinterlocutoryorderandtheappealcanbepreferred} against such^{orderregardbeing} had. to the^{nature,tenor,} effect and impact of the^order passed^{bythelearnedSingleJudge.}

¶15

Reliance is piaced on Full Bench^{JudgmentoftheMadhyaPradesh} High Court in the matter^{ofArvindKumarJain&Ors.V.$tateof} Madhya Pradesh^aOrs. {AIR^{2007MADHYAPRADESH276}.}

¶16

order, it would be

¶17

1. ln the instant^case,from perusal^{oftheimpugned} evident that the'same has been passed on the ground that, they provisions^{ofChhattisgarhPanchayat(RegistrationofColonizer,terms} g ‘the Rules’) are not applicable to

¶18

and conditions)^Rules,1999 (for^short lt has been also^{observedthatminimumareainthe}

¶19

the present case. land in dispute^{islessthan5000sq.meter,whereasthedefinitionof}

¶20

¶21

ccionizer under Section 2(b) of the. Ru!es prescribes minimum plot area ' of 5000 sq. meter.

¶22

From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that !earned Single Judge has arrived to the conclusion that area of respondent No.1 is less than 5000 sq. meter whereas the whole area for which project of respondent No.1 was sanctioned was much more than 5000 sq. meter.

¶23

Learned Single Judge bythe impugned order virtually recorded a finding which is conclusive in nature and, therefore, the bar contained in sub-section (1) of Section 2 of the Act would not come in way of fiiing writ appeal.

¶24

We have heard learned counsel for the appellants. We have perused the impugned order as also the memo of appeal.

¶25

From perusal of the order under challenge. it is clear that in the impugned order after recording the submissions of learned counsei for the petitioners the effect and operation of the order passed by the SDO (Revenue) (Anexure—PH) has been stayed until further orders considering the facts situation of the case.

¶26

r_ n V N

¶27

’,\

¶28

1o. From perusal of the order of the SDO, which was produced for our perusal^byShriHarit, it appears that SDO by its order has declared the colony constructed by the respondent/petitioner as illegal. imposing penalty^{ofRs.23.000/—,transferof} plots have been declared'null and void] The order of forfeiture of the right, title or interest of the colonizer a

¶29

in the land under illegal colonization has been passed under Section 61^-G of the Panchayat Raj Evam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 and

¶30

the same has been vested in Gram Panchayat Mangla.

¶31

x ‘\d

State of Chhattisgarh and 4 Others v. Geetanjali Constructions (Colonizer Developer and Builder) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Chhattisgarh and 4 Others v. Geetanjali Constructions (Colonizer Developer and Builder) and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baby T. Vargis Vs M.P. Housing Board and Ors.

Smt. Rekha Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

M/S Uniworth Ltd. Vs Comm.of Customs and Central Excise

Smt. Bindu Gurjar Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Parsadi Ram Nishad Vs State of Chhattisgarh

State of Chhattisgarh and 4 Others Vs Geetanjali Costructions (Colonizer Developer and Builder) 2 Others