Praveen Lawrence v. State Of Chhattisgarh

For Petitioner For State/Respondent(s) For Respondents No.4 & 5 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal Advocate : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate : Mr. Satish Gupta, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 28/03/2025 2

#1. Heard Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Satish Gupta, learned Government Advocate for State/respondent/s as well as Mr. Pankaj Agrawal Advocate, learned counsel for the respondents No.4 & 5.

#2. Since the matter is heard and decided finally, therefore, I.A. No.02/2024, which is an application for exemption from filing typed copy of the annexures is allowed.

#3. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner have prayed for following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the impugned notice dated 21.03.2025 issued by the respondent No.5.

10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents authorities particularly the respondent No. 4 & 5 not to take any further action in respect of the impugned notice dated 21.03.2025.

10.3 That, any other relief in favour of the petitioner, which this Hon’ble Court deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case”

#4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the notice for removal of encroachment while illegal construction passed by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur vide notice dated 21.03.2025 and 15 days time was granted to the petitioner, the petitioner challenged the said notice stating that at the time of construction of house, the area was not falling under the limits of Municipal Corporation, Raipur and as such, the petitioner was not aware of 3 the same and since he has constructed his house, he is ready and willing to get it compounded under Section 308 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956.

#5. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent-Municipal Corporation, Raipur has submitted that the petitioner has to move an appropriate application for compounding of the illegal construction and if, such an application is filed before Municipal Corporation, Raipur, they will consider and pass an appropriate order.

#6. Learned counsel for the petitioner at this juncture submits that since the removal notice has been issued, therefore, some interim protection may be granted till the filing of the application and on its decision, accordingly the Municipal Corporation, Raipur is directed not to take any coercive steps against the petitioner, till the decision on the application to be filed by the petitioner under Section 308 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 is finalized. The petitioner is directed to move an appropriate application within 15 days and in turn the authorities concerned are directed to decided the same within a stipulated time frame.

#7. Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi