Pankaj Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Pankaj Sahu Vs the State of Chhattisgarh — Chhattisgarh HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Pankaj Sahu has locus standi to seek restraint of respondent No.6's construction of shops on government land and the ancillary directions sought, when the State - the aggrieved party - has raised no objection. +2 more

Court's answer

Prima facie, the petitioner has no locus standi to file the instant petition, particularly as the State - the aggrieved party - has not raised any objection to respondent No.6's construction of shops.

Ratio / Principle

The disputed land is admittedly government land, and from the documents appended to the return it appears that respondent No.6 has already deposited the amount and possession has been handed over to respondent No.6.

Key takeaways

The State Government is not aggrieved by any action of respondent No.6 with regard to construction of the shops on the disputed land.ratio¶36
The petition is without any substance and is dismissed accordingly.ratio¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NAFR (neutral citation 2024:CGHC:37661). HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR, WPC No. 1137 of 2023, decided 24/09/2024 by Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput (Single Judge). Petitioner Pankaj Sahu sought directions to respondents 3 to 5 (Collector, SDO (Revenue) and Tahsildar, Mahasamund) to restrain respondent No.6 - Municipal Council, Mahasamund - from constructing shops on government land Khasra No. 1958 (area 5.690 hectares, at NH No. 353, Mahasamund city) originally allotted for the Tahsil Office, and further sought decision of his representation and of his application under Section 248 of the CGLRC filed on 20.01.2023. Counsel for respondent No.6 traced regularisation of the site through State circulars dated 08.06.2020 and 17.06.2020 (allotment authority with municipal councils and then the Collector), the council's allotment application (Annexure R-6/3), the Naib Tehsildar's letter of 25.01.2021 (Annexure R-6/4) requiring a deposit, its payment on 30.04.2021 and handing over of possession; State counsel adopted that stand. Holding the land admittedly government land on which respondent No.6 had deposited the amount and obtained possession, and that the State - the aggrieved party - had raised no objection to the shop construction, the court found the petitioner prima facie without locus standi, pronounced the petition devoid of substance and dismissed it.

1 / 3

2024:CGHC:37661

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPC No. 1137 of 2023

Pankaj Sahu S/o Shri Phoolchand Sahu Aged About 40 Years Occupation - Business, R/o Subhash Nagar, Ward No.25, Mahasamund, P.S. Mahasamund, District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner

versus

1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Revenue And Disaster Management Department, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2 - Secretary Nagriya Prashashan And Vikas Vibhag Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, New Raipur

3 - Collector Mahasamund, District Mahasamund, CG

4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Mahasamund

5 - Tahsildar Mahasamund

6 - Municipal Council Mahasamund Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Municipal Council Mahasamund ... Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Suni Sahu, Advocate For Respondent No.6 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate For R 1 to 5 : Shri Ajay Pandey, GA

(Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput)

Order on Board

(24/09/2024)

Following reliefs have been sought for by the petitioner in this petition:-

10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ by directing the respondent No. 3 to 5 to restrained the illegal construction over

2 / 3

the Govt. Land of Khasra No. 1958 which was allotted to the Tahsil Office, Mahasamund.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be please to issue direct the respondents to consider and decide the representation of petitioner as early as possible.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the Tahsildar to decide the application under Section 248 of the CGLRC filed on 20.01.2023 as per law.

10.4 Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.6 has started construction of the shops on the land bearing Khasra No. 1958 area being 5.690 hectares situated at middle of the Mahasamund City at NH No. 353 which was allotted for construction of the Tahsil Office, without there being any title of respondent No.6. He submits that such construction cannot be allowed without there being any legal authority in favour of respondent No.6. He submits that the petitioner made an application for removal of the said construction but the same has not been considered and therefore the relief prayed for in this petition may be granted.

Counsel for respondent No. 6 submits that vide circular dated 08.06.2020 a decision has been taken by the State Government to allot the land to the municipal councils. Relevant portion of that circular reads as under:

…jkT; ‘kklu],rnOnkjk] uxjh; fudk;ksa esa Lo;a dh fuf/k ;k vU; enksa ls ‘kkldh; Hkwfe ij fufeZr nqdkuksa ds ,deq’r fuiVku gsrq jktLo iqLrd ifji= [k.M pkj dzekad &1 dh df.Mdk 25 esa of.kZr leLr vkSipkfjdrkvksa dh iwfrZ djus ds i'pkr]jktLo iqLrd ifji= [k.M pkj dzekad & 1 dh df.Mdk 26 ds izko/kkuksa ds rgr]izns’k ds uxjh; fudk;ksa dks mudh ekax ds vuqlkj ,d :i, izfroxZQqV dh Vksdu nj ij ‘kkldh; HkwfEk vkcafVr djus ds fy, leLr dysDVjksa dks vf/kd`r djrk gSA mDr jkf’k 0029&Hkw&jktLo]0015 utwy Hkwfe ls izkIr Hkw&izC;kft esa fodyuh; gksxhA

;g vkns’k rRdky izHkko’khy gksXkkA

Thereafter by another circular dated 17.06.2020 the power to allot the land has been vested with the Collector, relevant portion whereof reads as under:

….fo”k;karxZr la;qDr lfpo]jktLo ,oa vkink izca/ku foHkkx ls izkIr i= dzekad 4 &24@lkr&1@2020 fnukad 08-06-2020 dh Nk;kizfr layXu dj ys[k gS fd uxjh;

3 / 3

fudk;ksa esa Lo;a dh fuf/k ;k vU; enksa ls ‘kkldh; Hkwfe ij fufeZr nqdkuksa ds ,deq’r fuiVku gsrq ,d :i, izfroxZQqV dh nj ls uxjh; fudk;ksa dks Hkwfe vkcaVu gsrq leLr dysDVjksa dks vf/kd`r fd;k x;k gSA

Subsequently, an application was made by respondent No.6 to the Collector vide Annexure R-6/3 for allotment of the disputed land in favour of the petitioner annexing the details of the land which is required to be allotted to respondent No.6. Thereafter Naib Tehsildar vide its letter dated 25.01.2021 annexure R-6/4 directed respondent No.6 to deposit certain amount for allotment of land and ultimately said amount was deposited on 30.04.2021 and the possession of the said disputed land has also been given to the petitioner. He submits that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present petition as it is the government land and the government has not raised any objection with regard to construction of the shops over the disputed land.

State counsel also adopts the submissions made on behalf of respondent No.6.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

Admittedly, the disputed land is the government land and from the documents appended to the return it appears that the certain amount has already been deposited by respondent No.6, the possession has also been handed over to respondent No.6 and as such the State Government is not aggrieved by any action of respondent No.6 with regard to construction of shops. Prima facie , the petitioner has no locus standi to file the instant petition particularly when the State which is the aggrieved party has not raised any objection

Petition is thus without any substance and is hereby dismissed accordingly.

Sd/-

(Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge

Jyotishi

Digitally signed by AVANISH AVANISH JYOTISHI Date: JYOTISHI 2024.09.26 10:24:27 +0530