Disposed

Dinesh Chourasiya v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Sept 2026WPC/4655/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition seeking to quash a notice for alleged encroachment, the High Court of Chhattisgarh held that since the notice itself provided an opportunity to claim title, the petitioner should not be deported from the property immediately. The court directed the petitioner to submit a reply with documents to the concerned authority and imposed a 30-day moratorium on coercive steps.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to submit reply/representation with documents to concerned authority; competent authority to decide within 30 days; no coercive steps against petitioner for 30 days.

Dinesh Chourasiya Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Landlord and Tenant | Chhattisgarh HC (2026)

CGHC010357702026

2026:CGHC:40292

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶6

WPC No. 4655 of 2026

¶7

1 - Dinesh Chourasiya S/o Ramchandra, Chourasiya, Aged About 39 Years R/o House No. 15, Ward, No. 27, Sector 11, Zone 01, Soniya Gandhi, Nagar Khursipar, Bhilai Durg C. G.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

RAVVAUTTEJKUMARRAJU Digitallysigned byRAVVA UTTEJKUMAR RAJUDate:2026.09.1618:42:32+0530

¶10

Versus

¶11

1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary Department Of Urban Administration And Development Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Atal Nagar District Raipur C. G.

¶12

2 - The Collector Durg Collectorate Office District Durg C. G.

¶13

3 - The Municipal Corporation Bhilai Through Its, Commissioner, Bhilai, District Durg C. G.

¶14

4 - The Zone Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg C.G.

¶15

5 - The Executive Engineer Public Works, Department District Durg C. G.

¶16

... Respondents

¶17

(Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.)

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr. Animesh Verma, Advocate. For State : Mr. Anway Tiwari, P.L. For Respondents No. 3 & 4 : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Advocate.

¶19

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board

15/09/2026

The petitioner has preferred the instant petition seeking the following reliefs:-

¶24

“10.1 It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the petitioner for its kind perusal.

¶25

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, direction thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned notice cum order dated 27/08/2026, same being vague, baseless and without jurisdiction (Annexure P/1).

¶26

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, direction, thereby restraining the respondents from interfering in the property right of the petitioners with respect to the subject property created by virtue of registered deed.

¶27

Or alternatively

¶28

That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, direction thereby directing the respondents to initiate acquisitions proceedings with respect to the subject property of the petitioner if the same is required for widening of road.

¶29

10.4 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order, direction thereby declaring the action of the respondents against the petitioner as without jurisdiction.

¶30

10.5 Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon’ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also be granted to the petitioner.”

¶31

¶32

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the notice dated 27.08.2026 (Annexure P/1), whereby he has been directed to remove the alleged encroachment. It is submitted that the petitioner is in possession of his own land and, therefore, the allegation of encroachment is not sustainable. He further submits that the notice itself recognizes the petitioner’s claim of title and permits him to submit an appropriate application along with the relevant documents.

¶33

Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner may approach the competent authority by submitting his reply along with all relevant documents, whereupon the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶34

Learned counsel appearing for respondents No. 3 & 4 submits that the petitioner may submit his representation/reply before the competent authority, which shall consider the same in accordance with law.

¶35

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court is of the view that, since the notice dated 27.08.2026 itself provides an opportunity to the petitioner to place his claim of title along with the relevant documents, it would be appropriate to grant the petitioner an opportunity to approach the competent authority. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to submit his reply/representation along with all relevant documents before the concerned authority. The concerned authority shall

¶36

¶37

consider and decide the same expeditiously, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. For a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner pursuant to the notice dated 27.08.2026.

¶38

With this observations and direction, this petition stands disposed of.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

¶41

Judge

¶42

U.K. Raju

Dinesh Chourasiya v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Chourasiya v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases