Nafr High Court
Case Details
1 BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Digitally signed by BABLU RAJENDRA BHANARKAR Date: 2025.01.29 17:54:40 +0530 2025:CGHC:5193-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 16 of 2025 1 - Rashmi Sagar W/o Late Mr. Ram Sagar Aged About 62 Years R/o 297/34 Street No. 14A, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sanjay Gupta S/o Late Mr. Parasnath Gupta Aged About 44 Years R/o St.No. 14, Plot No. 296/3, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Manoj Verma S/o S.K. Verma Aged About 67 Years R/o Street No. 14A, Plot No. 31, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh.
Legal Reasoning
4 - Dharmendra Bhagat (ward councillor of the said area) S/o Mr. Ravindra Bhagat Aged About 37 Years R/o Bhagat Nivas Plot No. 95, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Annu Lanka W/o Rajendra Lanka Aged About 52 Years R/o Chinni Chaya, Plot No. 6, Street No. 14, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Mr. Praveen Prasad S/o Mr. R.K. Prasad Aged About 56 Years R/o St. 14B, Plot No. 8, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Bhilai, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Collector District Durg (C.G.) 3 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg (C.G.) 4 - The Superintendent Of Police Bhilai, District Durg, (C.G.) 5 - Sub Divisional Magistrate Chawni/bhilai Nagar, District Durg (C.G.) 2 6 - Smt. Nilam Nayyer W/o Mr. Keval Kumar Nayyer Aged About 55 Years R/o 1-2, 17, Pragati Nagar, Risali, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Mr. Kewal Nayyer S/o Kuldeep Singh Nayyer Aged About 60 Years R/o 1-2, 17, Pragati Nagar, Risali, District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr.B.P.Singh, Advocate For Respondents : Mr.Shashank Thakur, Dy.A.G. No.1, 2, 4 and 5 For Respondent : Mr.R.K.Kesharwani, Advocate No.3 Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr.Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge
Decision
Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 29.01 .2025 1. Heard Mr.B.P.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr.Shashank Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for respondents No.1, 2 4 and 5/State and Mr.R.K.Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. 2. The present writ petition (PIL) has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers: “10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to remove the blockage of the entrance gate of the said colony from the immediate effect. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent’s authority to take action against the private respondent and to allow the 3 school bus, van, ambulance, fire brigades and other vehicles to pass through the main gate. 10.3 That this Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to arrange and procure safety measures of the local resident of the said colony. 10.4 That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given” 3. Facts of the case are that the colony, established in 1986, houses approximately 50 families, including senior citizens, schoolchildren, and working individuals. The colony's only entrance road, constructed in 1992 as per a municipal tender, was initially set at a width of 15 feet to accommodate essential traffic. However, this single entrance road has been rendered impassable due to encroachments made by respondents No. 6 and 7, their illegal actions have blocked the gate entirely, creating significant challenges for the residents in their daily lives and making it impossible for emergency vehicles like ambulances and fire brigades to enter the colony. This has raised serious concerns about safety, accessibility and fundamental rights, as the obstruction directly endangers the lives and well-being of the residents. The encroachment by respondents No. 6 and 7 has led to widespread disruption in the colony, causing public nuisance and violating the collective rights of the residents. The respondents have allegedly misused their influence to enforce the encroachment, threatening and intimidating residents, including the local councillor, who sought to address the issue. Further 4 aggravating the situation, the respondents have demanded a sum of 28,00,000/- from the petitioners and other residents to clear the blockage. This coercive behaviour has exacerbated the residents' grievances, leaving them without access to critical services like medical aid, education, and emergency response. School buses and vans cannot enter the colony, depriving children of their right to education. Moreover, the encroachment affects essential public utilities, such as electricity by enclosing electric poles within the illegally constructed boundary, thereby restricting access for repair or maintenance work. 4. Despite repeated complaints and representations to the municipal authorities, including the Home Minister, the residents' grievances have not been addressed effectively. Notices under Section 152 of the BNSS Act were issued by the authorities, and spot inspections were conducted, confirming the encroachments and public nuisance created by respondents No. 6 and 7. However, no concrete action was taken to resolve the matter. The private respondents, taking advantage of their influential status, filed a writ petition (WPC No. 6190/2024) and obtained the stay order from learned Single Judge of this Court on 10.12.2024. Armed with this stay order, the respondents have continued their disruptive activities, allegedly using it as leverage to intimidate the petitioners and strengthen their illegal encroachment. 5. The ongoing encroachment and obstruction have caused severe hardships to the residents, who are law-abiding, tax-paying citizens. Their constitutional rights to safety, communication, education, and 5 medical access are being blatantly violated. The blockage of the colony's sole entrance road poses a grave risk to the lives of its residents, particularly in emergencies. The respondents' actions disrupt the harmony and safety of the neighbourhood, highlighting the failure of municipal authorities to ensure the residents' basic rights and the rule of law. Despite being situated in a zone under the jurisdiction of local governance, the residents have received little to no support from the authorities, leaving them in a vulnerable and unsafe position. This matter not only underscores the need for judicial intervention to address the petitioners' grievances but also raises broader concerns about governance, public safety, and the protection of constitutional rights. 6. It transpires from the pleadings made in the present PIL that the petitioners are residents of the colony where respondents No.6 and 7 are also residing and respondents No.6 and 7 have made some encroachment at the gate of the colony and hence, the present petitioners have come up before this Court for the aforesaid prayers, but on a pointed query being made from learned counsel for the petitioners regarding the maintainability of the present PIL, he could not justify the same. Moreover, he has pointed out that there is a litigation going on between respondent No.6 and State of Chhattisgarh and others in WPC No.6190 of 2024 in which learned Single Judge of this Court has passed an interim order dated 10.12.2024, a copy of the same is annexed as Annexure P-9 and further, proceedings under Section 133 CrPC (Now Section 153 BNSS) are also pending between the parties. Hence, we are not inclined to interfere with the matter. 6 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition (PIL) is dismissed leaving it open to the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum for redressal of their grievances. Security amount stands forfeited. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Bablu