Lokmanya Sahkari Grih Nirman ... vs Anil Kumar Dhurandhar
2021 Latest Caselaw 2816 Chatt

                    HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                     WP227 No. 841 of 2015
   1. Lokmanya Sahkari Grih Nirman Sanstha Maryadit, Rohnipuram, Raipur Chhattisgarh,
      Through - Chairman
   2. Ashish Jha, S/o Dr. S.K. Jha, Shop No. B-3, Gole Chowk, Danganiya, Raipur,
      Chhattisgarh
   3. Anupam Deshmukh, S/o Shri M.L. Deshmukh, R/o Shop No. B-4, Gole Chowk,
      Danganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   4. Shri Satish Jain, S/o Shri Shivdayal Jain, R/o Shop No. B-5, Gole Chowk, Danganiya,
      Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   5. Shri Shivdayal Jain, S/o Shri Puranram Jain, R/o Shop No. N-6, Gole Chowk,
      Danganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   6. Shri Jagdish Nirwan, S/o Shri Late Marutirao Nirwan, R/o Shop No. B-7, Gole Chowk,
      Danganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                               ---- Petitioners
                                              Versus
   1. Anil Kumar Dhurandhar S/o Mahendra Kumar, R/o Azad Chowk, Raipur, through power
      of attorney Keshav Dhurandhar, S/o Late Mahendra Dhurandhar, R/o Azad Chowk,
      Raipur, Chhattisgarh, Chhattisgarh
   2. Smt. Jaishri Dhure, W/o Shri Chandrakant Dhure, R/o Shop No. B-1, Gole Chowk,
      Danganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   3. Smt. Meena Thakre, W/o Shri Madhukar Thakre, R/o Shop No. B-2, Gole Chowk,
      Danganiya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   4. Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh,
      District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
                                                                             ---- Respondents

21/10/2021 Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate with Mr. R.N. Jha, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Ashish Shrivastava, Senior Advocate with Mr. Rohishek Verma, Advocte for respondent No.1.

Ms. Akansha Jain, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State. Heard on the application for grant of interim relief. It is submitted by learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that respondent No.1 filed an application under Section 250 of the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959 (in short 'the Code, 1959') before the Naib Tahsildar for recovery of possession of disputed property under illegal encroachment of the petitioners. The provisions under Section 250 of the Code, 1959 is very clear that such application can be moved only in case of dispossession and not in a case of illegal encroachment. However, the application was entertained and the order was passed by the Tahsildar in favour of respondent No.1. The appeal preferred before the SDO was dismissed. The second appeal preferred before the Additional Commissioner, Raipur Division was also dismissed and similar order has been passed by the Board of Revenue by the impugned order dated 01-09-2015.

It is submitted that clearly the proceeding under Section 250 of the Code, 1959 was not maintainable. The petitioners have also filed civil suit which is pending. It is submitted that in the recent development notices have been issued against the petitioners by the Addl. Tahsildar, Raipur on the proceeding initiated by respondent No.1 for vacating the disputed property. Therefore, the petitioners may be protected from eviction during pendency of this petition.

Learned Senior counsel for respondent No.1 opposes the submission and submits that the petition has been filed by the petitioner No.1 society and others challenging the impugned order dated 01-09-2015 passed by the C.G. Revenue Board in which respondents No.2 to 6 were not party, no proper affidavit has been filed under any authorization in support of the petition. It is also submitted that no notice has been issued to petitioner No.1. Hence, objection has been raised regarding maintainability of the petition and regarding grant of interim relief to the petitioners.

In reply, it is submitted by learned Senior counsel for the petitioners that notice of eviction have been received by some of the petitioners, therefore, prayer is made for grant of interim relief. Reliance has been placed on the judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of Kiran Tandon Vs. Allahabad Development Authority and Another, (2004) 10 SCC 745 and in the matter of Chief Conservator of Forests, Govt. of A.P. Vs. Collector and others, (2003) 3 SCC 472. Reliance has also been placed on the order of this High Court passed on 12-11-2018 in WPC No.2275 of 2018 (Satpal Singh & Anr. Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.).

Considered on the submissions. Question has been raised in this petition regarding validity of the proceeding under Section 250 of the Code, 1959, therefore, it is ordered that eviction proceeding, if any initiated, against all the petitioners or any of the petitioners shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.

List this case after four weeks.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge

Aadil