Facts
The petitioner is the owner of a residential property at Amlidih, Raipur, purchased via registered sale deed in 2016.
Source reference: p. 3, para. 2While conducting renovation work, the petitioner was served a notice dated 17.12.2025 by the Tehsildar (Respondent No. 4) staying construction, followed by demolition notices dated 16.02.2025 and 02.04.2026 issued by the Municipal Corporation (Respondent No. 6) alleging illegal construction.
Source reference: p. 2-3, para. 1, 3The petitioner challenged these notices through a writ petition, contending they were issued without a proper revenue proceeding, without a copy of the complaint, and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
Source reference: p. 3, para. 3The respondents maintained that the notices were issued by competent authorities upon receiving complaints of unauthorized construction and were currently at the stage of verification.
Source reference: p. 4, para. 4Issues
1. Whether the impugned notices staying construction and directing demolition were issued in violation of the principles of natural justice and statutory procedure?
Source reference: p. 3, para. 3; p. 5, para. 72. Whether the petitioner is entitled to interim protection against coercive action pending a final decision by the municipal authorities?
Source reference: p. 5, para. 9Law Applied
The Court relied upon the principles of Natural Justice, specifically the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem) and the requirement for authorities to act through reasoned, non-arbitrary proceedings.
Source reference: p. 3-4, para. 3, 7The court further referenced the statutory framework of the applicable Municipal Act of Chhattisgarh, which empowers authorities to prevent unauthorized construction but mandates adherence to prescribed legal procedures and consideration of the affected party's objections.
Source reference: p. 4, para. 4-5Reasoning
The Court observed that while the respondent authorities have the jurisdiction to verify and prevent unauthorized construction, such power must be exercised strictly in accordance with law.
Source reference: p. 4, para. 5; p. 5, para. 7The Court did not adjudicate on the merits of the construction's legality but emphasized that the grievance of the petitioner regarding the lack of opportunity to be heard must be addressed.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 7Since the Municipal Corporation expressed willingness to consider the petitioner’s objections within a stipulated timeframe, the Court found it appropriate to shift the matter back to the administrative level for a fair determination.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 8The nexus between the law and the facts was established by requiring the authority to examine the petitioner's registered sale deed and existing possession before taking any final coercive steps.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 9Holding
The Court held that the authority must act in adherence to the principles of natural justice and provide a proper opportunity for a hearing.
The Court disposed of the writ petition without quashing the notices but with a mandate that the competent authority decide the petitioner’s representation/objections within 15 days from the receipt of the order.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 8, 10Crucially, the Court directed that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner’s property until the representation is decided.
Source reference: p. 5, para. 9No order as to costs was made.
Source reference: p. 6, para. 11Original Court PDF
P. DHANALAXMIvsSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in