M/S Usm Health Care vs Bhopal Municipal Corporation
- Court
- Madhya Pradesh High Court
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
1 WP-43010-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
th
ON THE 26 OF OCTOBER, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 43010 of 2026
CNR No.: MPHC010763632026
M/S USM HEALTH CARE
Versus
BHOPAL MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
Appearance:
Shri Vivek Ranjan Pandey, learned counsel along with Shri Amit Kumar
Bajpai - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Prashant Singh Advocate General assisted by Shri Suyash Mohan
Guru - DSG and Shri B.D Singh Addl. Advocate General for respondent No.1 & 2
Shri Abhijeet Awasthi advocate for respondent No.3.
ORDER
This petition has been filed while praying for the following reliefs:
"(i) To Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the
notice dated 08.10.2026 bearing no. 19157/ /2026
भ.अ.शा.
issued by Respondent No. 2 on the power as delegated by
Respondent No. 1
(ii) To issue a writ in nature of mandamus to direct that
the respondent no. 1 & 2 to restrain itself from taking any
action which may prejudice its already filed appeal and to
further declare that the sealing proceeding taken place on
07.10.2026 is unlawful and bad in law.
(iii) Any other relief which deems fit and proper looking at
the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded
in favour of the petitioners, in the interest of justice.
(iv) Cost may be awarded."
2. It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondents No.1 and 2 are
evolving different methods to take coercive steps against the present petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
2 WP-43010-2026
The present petitioner herein has been confronted with various show cause notices
as well orders time and again, and the petitioner has filed petitions also
questioning the aforesaid notices. However, subsequently, again the impugned
notice contained in Annexure P/29 dated 08/10/2026 has been issued.
3. It is the contention of the counsel for petitioner that the present
petitioner entered into an agreement with M.P. Red Cross Society, State Branch,
vide Annexure P/5. The agreement has to remain in force till 04.07.2029 and by
the said agreement, the petitioner has been permitted to run super specialty
hospital, in the premises in question. Unfortunately, the office bearers of the said
society since are also holding high positions in the State Government, the
petitioner, is being penalised at their behest. The petitioner herein came to know
about a communication, sent by the Indian Red Cross Society, to the Additional
Chief Secretary, Health and Medical Education Department, and by vide
Annexure P/13, a complaint was made against the present petitioner, that
activities, which are being carried out by the present petitioner, are impermissible
and therefore it was proposed that the criminal case be registered against the
present petitioner and steps should be taken to get the premises vacated.
Subsequently, the petitioner was served with various notices/orders, dated
02/07/2026 (Annexure P/16) and 07/07/2026 (Annexure P/17) and also a notice
dated 18.06.2026 (Annexure P/14). The petitioner thus filed a petition before this
Court vide WP No.29681/2026. The said petition was ultimately disposed of vide
order dated 03/08/2026 (Annexure P/18) in view of an undertaking given by the
learned Advocate General to the effect that no coercive action would be taken
against the petitioner unless full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner is
afforded. However, after the said undertaking, Chief Medical and Health Officer,
Bhopal submitted a report vide Annexure P/20 dated 31/08/2026, and, it was
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
3 WP-43010-2026
ordered in the report itself that registration of the petitioner's society be cancelled
and the petitioner was sought to be restrained from carrying out hospital activities
in the premises. The said order dated 31/08/2026 (Annexure P/20) was also
assailed by the petitioner by filing a petition before this Court vide WP
No.36929/2026. The said petition was disposed of by order dated 19/09/2026
(Annexure P/24) and the petitioner was extended liberty to prefer an appeal
against the said order in terms of Section 6 (3) of the M.P. Upcharyagriha Tatha
Rujopchar Sambandhi Sthapanaye (Registrikaran Tatha Anugyapan) Adhiniyam,
1973. The petitioner preferred an appeal in terms of the said liberty.
4. During pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the petitioner herein was
issued a notice dated 21/08/2026 (Annexure P/21), and by the said notice, the
petitioner was, called upon to explain unauthorized constructions on ground floor
as well as first floor, and also covering the open area. Subsequently another
notice/order dated 12/09/2026 (Annexure P/22) was issued, and by the said notice
the petitioner was called upon to vacate the premises within 24 hours, as
according to opening paragraph of the said notice, the petitioner was using the
premises for a purpose other than the one for which it was leased out. The said
order dated 12.09.2026 (Annexure P/22) was assailed by the petitioner by filing
WP No.38889/2026 (Annexure P/25). However, the said petition was withdrawn
vide order dated 19/09/2026 with liberty to avail the remedy under Section 403 of
the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act 1956. The petitioner in terms of
the said liberty, filed an appeal before the Appellate Committee under Section 403
of Municipal Corporation Act. The petitioner also prayed for interim relief. The
said appeal was filed on 22/09/2026 (Annexure P/26) and no order on that appeal
has been passed as yet by the Appellate Committee. However, subsequent to that,
Municipal Corporation sent a communication to Deputy Commissioner, (Police),
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
4 WP-43010-2026
and requested him to provide police force, which was required for eviction of the
premises occupied by the present petitioner, and subsequently, the premises of the
petitioner was sealed/locked, photographs of which are brought on record as
Annexure P/28. The petitioner was also issued a notice dated 08/10/2026 vide
Annexure P/29, by the Assistant Engineer (Building Officer) and the petitioner
was called upon to remove the unauthorised construction, including the second
floor, shed on the third floor, as well as the covered area, and encroachment on the
ground floor. Therefore, the petitioner had to approach this Court by way of the
present petition assailing the said notice contained in Annexure P/29 dated
08/10/2026.
5. It is the contention of the counsel that it's a case where the State
Authorities are hand in glove with the Municipal Corporation Authorities. The
office bearers of the Red Cross Society are also officers of the State Government,
and therefore, the power/authority of the Municipal Corporation is being misused
to take coercive steps against the present petitioner. The action is illegal and also
contrary to law as no decision on the petitioner's pending appeal has been taken as
yet. The counsel in support of his submission has placed reliance on the decision
of the Apex Court in Siemens Ltd. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. reported in
(2006) 12 SCC 33. Counsel for the petitioner also submits that various equipment
and machinery required for medical investigation are lying in the premises.
6. Counsel for the respondent Nos.1 & 2, learned Advocate General,
submits that the petition deserves to be dismissed. It is a case where the petitioner
is making a futile attempt to club different causes of action. It is the contention of
the counsel that the petitioner herein was issued two notices on 21/08/2026, one
notice has been brought on record by the petitioner himself as Annexure P/21 and
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
5 WP-43010-2026
the another notice of same date i.e. dated 21/08/2026 was with regard to
demolition of unauthorised constructions in the building, which has been filed by
the respondents along with the return. The said notice was with regard to misuse
of the property upon changing its nature. So far as the notice contained in
Annexure P/21 is concerned, the petitioner herein did not make any effort to reply
to the same or assail the same and while suppressing the notice, which is at page
No.22 of the return, this petition has been filed just in order to mislead the Court.
7. It is the contention of the Advocate General that the notice dated
21/08/2026 bearing No.6280/2026, issued under Rule 11 of the M.P. Bhumi Vikas
Niyam, 2012 and by the said notice, the petitioner was called upon to close
unauthorized activity in the building premises and to restore its original purpose
and in the event of failure, action under Section 301(4) of M.P. Municipal
Corporation Act, 1956, were proposed. After notice dated 21/08/2026 bearing
No.6280/2026 subsequent notice dated 12/09/2026 was assailed by the petitioner
by filing WP No.38889/2026 which was withdrawn by the petitioner himself;
therefore, the said notice is different than the subject matter of the notice contained
in Annexure P/21. The notice dated 21/08/2026 (Annexure P/21) was followed by
notice dated 08/10/2026 (Annexure P/29). Since the petitioner has not disputed
the notice dated 21/08/2026 (Annexure P/21) at any point of time, the petitioner is
precluded from assailing the impugned notice at this stage. Thus, in view of the
aforesaid, the petition deserves to be dismissed. To support his contention,
counsel has placed reliance on the decision of the Apex Court in Rajendra Kumar
Barjatya and Anr. Vs. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad and Ors. reported in 2024
SCC OnLine SC 3767 and submits that the unauthorised commercial activities are
to be taken note of seriously and appropriate action is required to be taken by the
Municipal Corporation. Learned Advocate General further submits that the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
6 WP-43010-2026
petitioner has also taken recourse to forgery and the certificate contained in
Annexure P/22; is forged; therefore, the Municipal Corporation be also permitted
to take appropriate action against the petitioner as regards the aforesaid criminal
act.
8. Counsel for respondent No.3 submits that the writ petition deserves to
be dismissed inasmuch as against the present petitioner, a communication was sent
by Red Cross Society vide Annexure P/13 dated 03/06/2026 to Additional Chief
Secretary as regards the unauthorised use of the premises by the present petitioner.
It is submitted by the counsel that the then office bearers of the Executive,
Medical Committee and Finance Committee were hand in gloves with the present
petitioner, and therefore, the property of the Red Cross Society was sought to be
misappropriated, and there was unauthorised use of the premises. There could not
have been any commercial activity in the premises; therefore, this fact was
brought to the notice of the Additional Chief Secretary vide Annexure P/13. It is
thus contended by the counsel that the action which is being taken by the
Municipal Corporation is in accordance with law and no interference with the
same is warranted.
9. Having considered the submission advanced on behalf of the parties
and perusal of the record reflects that the petitioner herein was confronted with a
notice dated 12.09.2026, contained in Annexure P/22, which is reproduced herein:
" ,
उपरो
वषयातगत आपको सूिचत कया जाता है क आपको
/
इस काया लय ारा उपरो
थल पर आवासीन #योजन
कामकाजी म हला छा &ावास हेतु #द* भवन अनु +ा के वपर,त
( )
बना अनुमित के अवैध /प से अिधवािसत अिधभोग उपयोग
,
उ 0लघन कया जा रहा है. जो क म. # नगर पािलक िनगम
1956 301 (4)
अिधिनयम क 2 धारा क 2 उपधारा के #ावधान3 के
अंतग त अवैधािनक क 2 5ेणी म 7 आता है।
संदिभ त सूचना प & से आपको उ
अवैधािनक कृ :य के स ;ब<ध
,
म 7 अवगत कराया जाकर विध अनुसार प = रखने हेतु एवं
( )
अिधवािसत अिधभोग उपयोग उ 0लघन बंद कये जाने हेतु
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
7 WP-43010-2026
समुिचत अवसर #दान कया गया परतु आपके ारा उ
के सबंध
म 7 कोई समाधानकारक उ *र # तुत नह ,ं कया गया है। ना ह ,
थल अिधभोग का उ 0लंघन बंद कया गया है।
:
अत उपरो
अवैधािनक कृ :य कये जाने के संबंध म 7 म. #. नगर
1956 303(1)
पािलक िनगम अिधिनयम क 2 धारा के अ <तगत
"Power of Commissioner to direct removal of person from
building in which works are unlawfully carried on or which
are unlawfully occupied"
श
य3 को #योग म 7 लाते हुये िन दA
,
#ावधान3 म 7 अंतर वA अनुसार आपको आदेिशत कया जाता है
24
क उ
िनिम त अवैधािनक अिधवािसत भवन का घ Bटे क 2.
/ ,
कालाविध म 7 Dर
खाली कर अवगत कराना सुिन EFत कर 7
अ <यथा क 2 E थित म 7 म. #. नगर पािलक िनगम अिधिनयम
1956
के #ावधानो अंतग त काय वाह, क 2 जायेगी। Eजसक2 स ;पूण
"
जवाबदार , आपक 2 :वयं क 2 होगी।
10. A perusal of the aforesaid notice reflects that the allegation against the
petitioner was that the premises in question was to be used for a residential
purpose/working women hostel, but the petitioner herein was continuing activity
contrary to the purpose, and the petitioner did not file any reply to the notice
which was issued to him, accordingly, the petitioner was called upon to vacate the
premises within 24 hours. The said notice was assailed by the petitioner by filing
WP No.38889 of 2026. The said petition was withdrawn by the petitioner when
the petitioner was confronted with the issue that certain important documents were
not placed before the Court and there was an alternate efficacious remedy
available with him. The order passed by the Court in WP 38889 of 2026 also
produced herein:
"After arguing at length, when confronted with the fact that
certain documents have not been placed before this Court
for consideration coupled with the fact that there is an
alternative and efficacious remedy available to the
petitioners in terms of Section 403 of the Madhya Pradesh
Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, learned counsel for the
petitioners prays for withdrawal of this petition with a
liberty to avail the same in accordance with law.
Prayer allowed.
The petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty
as prayed for."
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
8 WP-43010-2026
11. The petitioner undisputedly in view of the aforesaid liberty filed a
petition under Section 403 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 before the
Appellate Committee. Memorandum of appeal is also available as Annexure P/26
and as per the receipt which is available on the front page, the appeal was
preferred by the petitioner on 22.09.2026. According to the petitioner, no order in
that appeal has been passed as yet and in the memorandum of appeal itself, there is
a prayer for interim relief also by the present petitioner. During pendency of the
said appeal, on 05.10.2026, the Municipal Corporation sought assistance of police
to take possession of the property on 07.10.2026, and as per the pleadings,
pursuant to the communication of the Municipal Corporation contained in
Annexure P/27 dated 05.10.2026, the premises of the petitioner was sealed/locked
on 07.10.2026. The photographs have been brought on record as Annexure
P/28. Therefore, the factum regarding the sealing/locking of the premises
contained in Annexure P/28 is undisputed. It is not disputed by the respondent
that since the premises itself is sealed, as on date no activity in the premises is
being carried out by anyone, including the present petitioner. It is also undisputed
that after putting the lock on the premises, the impugned notice contained in
Annexure P/29 has been issued on 08.10.2026 by the Assistant Engineer
(Building Officer) to the present petitioner.
12. The Municipal Corporation is already in symbolic possession of the
property as the property has been sealed/locked by the Municipal Corporation. By
the impugned notice, the Municipal Corporation intends to demolish the
unauthorised construction on the property in question. The issue of unauthorised
construction has been taken note of recently by the Apex Court in the case of
Rajendra Kumar Barjatya (supra), which is reproduced as under:
"19. In a catena of decisions, this Court has categorically
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
9 WP-43010-2026
held that illegally of unauthorized construction cannot be
perpetuated. If the construction is made in contravention of
the Acts/Rules, it would be construed as illegal and
unauthorized construction, which has to be necessarily
demolished. It cannot be legitimized or protected solely
under the ruse of the passage of time or citing inaction of the
authorities or by taking recourse to the excuse that
substantial money has been spent on the said construction.
The following decisions are of relevance and hence cited
herein below to drive home the point that unauthorized
constructions must be dealt with, with an iron hand and not
kid gloves.........
21. Therefore, in the larger public interest, we are inclined
to issue the following directions, in addition to the directives
issued by this Court in Re : Directions in the matter of
demolition of structures(supra):
(i) While issuing the building planning permission, an
undertaking be obtained from the builder/applicant, as the
case may be, to the effect that possession of the building will
be entrusted and/or handed over to the owners/beneficiaries
only after obtaining completion/occupation certificate from
the authorities concerned.
(ii) The builder/developer/owner shall cause to be displayed
at the construction site, a copy of the approved plan during
the entire period of construction and the authorities
concerned shall inspect the premises periodically and
maintain a record of such inspection in their official records.
(iii) Upon conducting personal inspection and being satisfied
that the building is constructed in accordance with the
building planning permission given and there is no deviation
in such construction in any manner, the
completion/occupation certificate in respect of
residential/commercial building, be issued by the authority
concerned to the parties concerned, without causing undue
delay.
If any deviation is noticed, action must be taken in
accordance with the Act and the process of issuance of
completion/occupation certificate should be deferred, unless
and until the deviations pointed out are completely rectified.
(iv) All the necessary service connections, such as,
Electricity, water supply, sewerage connection, etc., shall be
given by the service provider/Board to the buildings only
after the production of the completion/occupation certificate.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
10 WP-43010-2026
(v) Even after issuance of completion certificate,
deviation/violation if any contrary to the planning
permission brought to the notice of the authority immediate
steps be taken by the said authority concerned, in
accordance with law, against the builder/owner/occupant;
and the official, who is responsible for issuance of wrongful
completion/occupation certificate shall be proceeded
departmentally forthwith.
(vi) No permission/licence to conduct any business/trade
must be given by any authorities including local bodies of
States/Union Territories in any unauthorized building
irrespective of it being residential or commercial building.
(vii) The development must be in conformity with the zonal
plan and usage. Any modification to such zonal plan and
usage must be taken by strictly following the rules in place
and in consideration of the larger public interest and the
impact on the environment.
(viii) Whenever any request is made by the respective
authority under the planning department/local body for co-
operation from another department to take action against any
unauthorized construction, the latter shall render immediate
assistance and co-operation and any delay or dereliction
would be viewed seriously. The States/UT must also take
disciplinary action against the erring officials once it is
brought to their knowledge.
(ix) In the event of any application/appeal/revision being
filed by the owner or builder against the non-issuance of
completion certificate or for regularisation of unauthorised
construction or rectification of deviation etc., the same shall
be disposed of by the authority concerned, including the
pending appeals/revisions, as expeditiously as possible, in
any event not later than 90 days as statutorily provided.
(x) If the authorities strictly adhere to the earlier directions
issued by this court and those being passed today, they
would have deterrent effect and the quantum of litigation
before the Tribunal/Courts relating to house/building
constructions would come down drastically. Hence,
necessary instructions should be issued by all the State/UT
Governments in the form of Circular to all concerned with a
warning that all directions must be scrupulously followed
and failure to do so will be viewed seriously, with
departmental action being initiated against the erring
officials as per law.
(xi) Banks/financial institutions shall sanction loan against
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
11 WP-43010-2026
any building as a security only after verifying the
completion/occupation certificate issued to a building on
production of the same by the parties concerned.
(xii) The violation of any of the directions would lead to
initiation of contempt proceedings in addition to the
prosecution under the respective laws."
13. The present petitioner was issued a notice dated 21.08.2026
contained in Annexure P/21. Apparently, there is no document on record to
demonstrate that the petitioner filed any reply or response to the said notice dated
21.08.2026 (Annexure P/21). The impugned notice has been issued in
continuation of the previous notice dated 21.08.2026. Therefore, this Court is of
the view that since the petitioner has not disputed the said notice by filing any
response or reply, the petitioner at this stage is precluded from questioning the
impugned notice. According to the petitioner, various hospital equipment and
machinery are lying in the premises. Therefore, in this view of the matter, it
would be conducive that the petitioner be permitted to remove its movable
belongings, including the said hospital equipment and machinery.
14. Hence, without interfering with the notice impugned, the petition
stands disposed of with the following directions:
"(A) The petitioner shall appear before respondent No.1 on
18/11/2026, and respondent No.1, in turn, shall permit the petitioner to
remove all its movable belonging, including the hospital equipment and
machinery. An inventory shall also be prepared and copies of the same
shall be reciprocally acknowledged by the parties.
(B) If the removal of equipment and machinery is not
possible in a day, the petitioner would be given another day to remove
the same.
(C) The removal of equipment & machinery would be subject
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-JBP:85771
12 WP-43010-2026
to the decision in appeal pending before the Appellate Committee
under Section 403 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956.
(D) After removal of equipment and machinery etc., the
Municipal Corporation would be at liberty to proceed in accordance
with law subject to the interlocutory/final order by the Appellate
Committee.
(E). In the event of failure by the petitioner to appear before
the Municipal Corporation on 18/11/2026, the Municipal Corporation
would be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. "
15. With the aforesaid, the petition stands disposed of.
(MANINDER S. BHATTI)
JUDGE
Astha
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: ASTHA SEN
Signing time: 30-10-
2026 16:33:06