Skip to content
Order
  • Library
  • Features
  • About
  • Blog
  • Contact
Get started
Book a Demo

Order

At Order.law, we’re building India’s leading AI-powered legal research platform.Designed for solo lawyers, law firms, and corporate legal teams, Order helps you find relevant case law, analyze judgments, and draft with confidence faster and smarter.

Product

  • Features
  • Blog

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms

Library

  • Acts
  • Judgments
© 2025 Order. All rights reserved.
  1. Home/
  2. Library/
  3. High Court Of Chhattisgarh/
  4. 2024/
  5. September

Ashish Gupta vs. State of Chhattisgarh

Decided on 30 September 2024• Citation: WPC/3574/2024• High Court of Chhattisgarh
Download PDF

Read Judgment


                                            1 / 3                                   
                                                                2024:CGHC:39013     
                                                                     NAFR           
                        HIGH COURT  OF  CHHATTISGARH   AT BILASPUR                  
                                     WPC  No. 3574 of 2024                          
               1 - Ashish Gupta S/o Late R.C. Gupta Aged About 49 Years Administrtor Of Dainik Chintak,
               Chintak Bhavan, Station Road, Durg District Durg C.G.                
                                                                    ... Petitioner  
                                            versus                                  
               1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhawan,
               Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur District Raipur C.G.             
               2 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, Durg Zone, Durg C.G. 
               3 - Assistant Engineer Public Works Department, Durg Zone, Durg C.G. 
               4 - Sarpanch Gram Panchayt Anora, (Kh) District Durg C.G.            
               5 - Secretary Gram Panchayat (Kh), District Durg C.G.                
               6 - Sarpnach Gram Panchayat Mahamara District Durg C.G.              
               7 - Secretary Gram Panchayat Mahamara District Durg C.G.             
               8 - Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Anjora Janpat Panchayat Rajnandgaon C.G. 
               9 - Secretary Gram Panchayat Anjora Janpat Panchayat Rajnandgaon C.G.
                                                                  ... Respondents   
               For Petitioner   :    Mr. Rajendra Kumar Patel, Advocate             
               For Respondent/ State : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P. L.               
                             ({Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput})           
                                        Order on Board                              
               30/09/2024                                                           
                  1. The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:- 

                                            2 / 3                                   
                    10.1 This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records
                    pertaining to the case of the petitioner from the possession of the respondents for its
                    kind perusal.                                                   
                    10.2 That, the Hon’ble court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash
                    the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the respondents No.2 & 3.  
                    10.3 Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon’ble Court may think proper in view
                    of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.
                  2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide an order dated 04.09.2023
                    Annexure P-7, the petitioner was permitted to install the hording at village Panchayat
                    Mahmara Anjora (k) and Anjora (kha) details of which is mentioned hereinbelow:-
                    1.्ቇाम पचं ायत महमरा : पृथ्वी पैलेस महमरा के सामने से अंजोरा (क) तक जी रोड़ विव्ቕुत पोल पर
                    60x30 का साइज 28 नग एवं डि!वाई!र पर यूविनपोल 20x20 का साईज 05 नग लगाई जावेगी।
                    2. ्ቇाम पंचायत अंजोरा (क) से ्ቇाम पचं ायत अंजोरा (ख) तक यूविनपोल / होኌ᭓!ग 20x20 का साई
                    नग डि!वाई!र से लगाई जावेगी।                                     
                    3. ्ቇाम पचं ायत अंजोरा (ख): राजेन््ቖ सेन के व्यवसाडियक परिरसर के सामने से बायपास चौराहा तक
                    जी. रोड़ डि!वाई!र पर होኌ᭓!ग 06X03 का साईज संख्या 30 नग विव्ቕुत पोल में 20x20 का साईज
                    05 नग डि!वाई!र से लगाई जावेगी।                                  
                    4. ्ቇाम पंचायत अंजोरा (ख) बाईपास चौराहा बांधा चौराहा बांधा जलाशय के पास के नीचे यविू नपोल
                    40x40 साईज का 02 नग लगाई जावेगी।                                
                  3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that thereafter an agreement was
                    also executed between the petitioner and the concerned Gram Panchayat Anjora. He
                    submits that suddenly the impugned order dated 08.04.2024 Annexure P-11 was
                    passed in which it has been stated that the earlier permission dated 04.09.2023 is
                    canceled because of some unavoidable reasons and directed that the hoardings may
                    be removed within a period of 3 working days. He submits that before passing the
                    impugned order Annexure P-11, no notice or opportunity of hearing was granted and
                    no reason has been assigned as to why the earlier order dated 04.09.2023 Annexure
                    P-7 was canceled. Therefore, he submits that the relief as claimed by the petitioner
                    may be granted.                                                 
                  4. Opposing the submissions, Mr. Kesharwani submits that one of the hoardings which
                    was installed by the petitioner fell down during the wind and therefore, the decision
                    was taken to cancel the permission.                             

                                            3 / 3                                   
                  5. Replying to this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order
                    was 08.04.2024 and the allegations with regard to falling of hoarding is of June,
                    2024, therefore, they cannot take the reason which has been assigned in the return,
                    apart from this, he submits that hoarding has fallen down on account of some theft of
                    nut bolt and for which he has already made a complaint to the Police and action has
                    been taken, therefore, it cannot be said that hoarding installed by the petitioner is not
                    safe for the public at large, therefore, impugned order may be set aside.
                  6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.  
                  7. Perusal of record indicates that the permission to install the hoarding was granted on
                    04.09.2023 and some agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the
                    concerned Gram Panchayat. Permission was also granted by the concerned Gram
                    Panchayat for installation of hoarding. From the impugned order, it appears that
                    without assigning any reasons, No Objection Certificate dated 04.09.2023 was
                    canceled and direction was given to remove the hoarding within a period of 3 days.
                    The defence has been taken that one of the hoardings has fallen down because of
                    wind seem to be after the impugned order was passed as the paper cutting which has
                    been filed of 13.06.2024. Therefore, it is well settled that respondent cannot improve
                    their case and they cannot deviate from the reasons assigned in the order impugned.
                    No reasons as such is assigned in the impugned order, therefore, it requires to be set
                    aside, however, the respondent/ State is directed to judge the strength of the hoarding
                    elected by the petitioner and after due satisfaction if it is found that the hoardings are
                    not endanger for public at large, may pass appropriate order. The exercise be done
                    within a period of 60 days from the date of production of copy of this order in
                    presence of the petitioner.                                     
                  8. With this observation, this writ petition stand disposed of.   
                                                                 Sd/-               
               Digitally                                                            
               signed by                                                            
               PARUL                                     ({Sachin Singh Rajput })   
        PARUL                                                                       
               MITTAL                                                               
        MITTAL Date:                                                                
                                                                JUDGE               
               2024.10.08                                                           
               17:40:31                                                             
               +0530                                                                
               Parul