2024:CGHC:31686 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4179 of 2024

1 - Deepak Kumar Jadwani S/o Shri Khushi Ram Jadwani Aged About 53 Years R/o House No. 52/53 Vip Estate Khamardih - Raipur (C.G.)

---- Petitioner versus

1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.)

2 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Raipur, Nagar Nigam Head Office Near Mahila Police Thana Gandhi Udyan Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Zone Commissioner Zone No. 09 Municipal Corporation Raipur District Raipur (C.G.)

---- Respondents For Petitioner : Dr. Shailesh Ahuja, Advocate For State-Respondent No.1 : Mr. R.K. Gupta, Additional A.G.

For Respondent No.2 & 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate (Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge)

Order on Board

21/08/2024 Digitally signed by 1. Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following relief (s) :-

BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Date: “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the

2024.08.22 +0530 respondents to place all the records of the case for kind perusal of the Hon'ble Court.

10.2 That the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari quashing the notice dated 26th July 2024 issued by the Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G)

10.3 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to not take any coercive action against the Petitioner based on the impugned notice.

10.4 That, such other reliefs as the Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may also be granted to the petitioner in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner after purchase of land from Pramila Grih Nirman Sahakari Samit Maryadit, Raipur has obtained building permission of residential house from respondent No.2. After obtaining building permission, petitioner has started construction which is under process. Surprisingly without inspecting building premises of petitioner, notice was served upon petitioner on 26.07.2024, in which, there is no specific mention as to what irregularities, if any, is committed by petitioner. The notice is issued in exercise of powers under Section 293 (1) (2) and Section 302 of the C.G. Municipal Corporation Act, 1956. Immediately thereafter, petitioner approached the respondent No.3, submitted an application pleading therein that petitioner is raising construction in accordance with building permission and further requested to conduct inspection of the spot/site and if any, irregularities is committed, then petitioner is ready to compound the said offence of construction of building, if pointed. The representation to respondent No.3 is dated

29.07.2024, but till date no decision has been taken on his representation.

3. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioner and would submit that perusal of the notice Annexure P-5 would show that unwanted clauses have been marked to be not read except the clause 6 and 7. Clause -6 talks of violation of floor area ratio and clause -7 talks of height of building to be excess than the building permission. He pointed out that petitioner is having remedy of appeal under Section 403 of the Act of 1956, therefore, petitioner can file appropriate proceedings. However, upon asking with respect to provisions of compounding of offence of construction of building, he contended that provision is there, however, petitioner has not submitted any application mentioning the specific provisions for compounding of offence.

4. I have heard learned counsel for parties and perused the documents placed on record.

5. Perusal of the document Annexure P-5 would show that notice was issued to petitioner mentioning subject that construction is being made without permission/contrary to the permission granted by Municipal Corporation. In the notice there is no specific mention as to what is the floor area ratio to say that there is vio