JAMUNA PRASAD GUPTA vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

1

CGHC010439282026 2026:CGHC:46913
NAFR
VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Digitally signed
by VISHAKHA
BEOHAR
WPC No. 5660 of 2026
1 - Jamuna Prasad Gupta S/o Late Suresh Chand Gupta Aged About 55
Years R/o Pandri, Behind Shiv Mandir / Mayur Kwality Bank, Raipur,
District Raipur C. G.
2 - Mahboob Solanki S/o Late Lal Mohammad @ Lala Solanki Aged
About 48 Years R/o Gandhi Nagar, Pandri, Near Sai Kirana, Raipur,
District Raipur C. G.
3 - Guman Singh Rajpurohit S/o Sultan Singh Rajpurohit Aged About 64
Years R/o Mowa, Dubey Colony, Tehsil And District Raipur C. G.
Commercial Address Pandri, Opposite Shiv Bagh, Jeevan Bima Marg,
Raipur, District Raipur C. G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban
Administration And Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava
Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur C. G.
2 - Municipal Corporation Raipur Through Its Commissioner, Rajiv
Bhawan, White House, Raipur, District Raipur C. G.
3 - Zone Commissioner Zone No. 02, Municipal Corporation Raipur,
District Raipur C. G.

2
4 - Dheeraj Arora S/o Late Shri Shyam Lal Arora And Late Smt. Vimla
Arora R/o Pandri Tarai, Shahid Hemu Kalani Ward No. 28, Raipur,
District Raipur C. G. ( Son And Legal Heir/successor Of Late Smt. Vimla
Arora)
... Respondents
(Cause-title taken from the Case Information System)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Petitioner :- Mr. Anukul Biswas, Advocate
For State :- Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. G.A.
For Respondents No.2&3 :- Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order On Board
05.11.2026
1. By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioners are challenging
the legality and validity of Notice No. 93/ . . . ./ . . ./
भ नि अ प्र न पा नि जोन
.02/2026 dated 29.09.2026, served upon them on 23.10.2026,
क्र
issued by respondent No. 3 under Sections 309 and 310 of the
Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, whereby they have
been directed to immediately remove/demolish the subject shop
premises.
2. Following reliefs have been prayed in this petition:-
“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased
to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of
the PETITIONERS

3
10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
issue an appropriate Writ, Order, or Direction in the
nature of Certiorari quashing the impugned Notice
dated 29.09.2026 (Annexure P/1) issued by
Respondent No. 3;
10.3 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
issue an appropriate Writ/Direction commanding
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to conduct a fresh structural
audit through an independent expert body (NIT Raipur
/ Government Engineering College);
10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to
restrain the respondents from taking any coercive
action or demolishing the shop premises occupied by
PETITIONERS during pendency of this petition;
10.5 Any other relief order or direction which may
deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the
case including the cost of the petition.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned
notice and the consequential action proposed by the respondent
authorities are arbitrary, illegal, discriminatory and violative of
Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is
contended that Sections 309 and 310 of the Chhattisgarh
Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, cannot be invoked at the
instance of private landlords, in collusion with municipal
authorities, to forcibly evict statutory tenants without resorting to
the remedy available under the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act,
2011. It is further submitted that no structural audit report or safety
assessment conducted by a certified structural engineer was

4
supplied to the petitioners before issuance of the impugned
notice. Learned counsel also submits that the principles of natural
justice have been violated, as the objections submitted by the
petitioners on 26.10.2026 and their police complaint dated
01.11.2026 have not been considered by the respondent
authorities. On these grounds, learned counsel prays for
interference by this Court.
4. Learned State counsel submits that the impugned notice has been
issued by the competent municipal authority in exercise of the
statutory powers conferred under Sections 309 and 310 of the
Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, and that the action
taken by the municipal authorities is in accordance with law.
5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 opposes
the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners and submits
that the impugned notice has been issued in discharge of the
statutory duties of the Municipal Corporation. It is contended that
the municipal authorities are empowered under the aforesaid
provisions to take appropriate action in matters concerning the
safety and condition of buildings. Accordingly, the petitioners
cannot claim an absolute right to prevent the authorities from
exercising their statutory powers. On these grounds, learned
counsel prays for dismissal of the writ petition.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material available on record.

5
7. Considering the nature of the dispute and the submissions made
by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the view that the
petitioners may approach the competent authority of the Municipal
Corporation by way of an appropriate application, raising all their
grievances with regard to the impugned notice. Accordingly, the
petitioners are granted liberty to file a fresh application, if not
already filed, before the competent authority of respondent
Municipal Corporation, raising all relevant objections and grounds
available to them.
8. In the event such an application is filed, the respondent Municipal
Corporation shall consider and decide the same, in accordance
with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, preferably
within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such
application.
9. Needless to observe that the competent authority shall consider
the objections raised by the petitioners independently, without
being influenced by any observation made in this order.
10.With the aforesaid directions, the writ petition stands disposed
of.
sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge
Vishakha