Disposed¶28

Bilal Husain v. Union of India

Chhattisgarh HC18 Nov 2025WPC/4772/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bilal Husain v. Union of India and others; WPC No. 4772 of 2023; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge; order dated 19/11/2025; NAFR; LIC Housing Finance Limited; National Housing Bank; Ministry of Housing and Urban Poverty Alleviation; subsidy amount; representation dated 04.01.2022; Annexure P/5; limited prayer; direction to decide representation within 03 weeks; writ petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Respondents No. 3 & 4 (Chief Grievance Redressal Officer, National Housing Bank, and Regional Manager, LIC Housing Finance Limited) to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure P/5) collectively, expeditiously, preferably within 03 weeks from receipt of copy of the order, if not already decided. ¶28

Bilal Husain Vs Union of India — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether respondent LIC Housing Finance Ltd. should be directed to pay the subsidy amount from its own account, the delay being attributed to the respondent authority (prayer 10.1 of the writ petition; not pressed at hearing). +1 more

¶19

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of at this stage by directing Respondents No. 3 & 4 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure P/5) collectively.

¶25

Key takeaways

The decision on the representation is to be made expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, if not already decided.ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, WPC No. 4772 of 2023, order dated 19/11/2025 (Parth Prateem Sahu, J.). The petitioner had sought a declaration that the impugned action of respondent LIC Housing Finance Ltd. be set right by paying the subsidy amount from its own account, the delay being attributed to the respondent authority. At hearing, the petitioner did not press the writ petition on merits and confined his prayer to a direction that Respondents No. 3 (Chief Grievance Redressal Officer, National Housing Bank) and No. 4 (Regional Manager, LIC Housing Finance Limited) take a decision on his representation dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure P/5); counsel for the respondents raised no objection to this limited prayer. Disposing of the writ petition, the Court directed Respondents No. 3 & 4 to consider and decide the pending representation collectively, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order, if not already decided.

2025:CGHC:56340

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 4772 of 2023

¶6

1 - Bilal Husain S/o. Shri Mumtaz Husain, Aged About 33 Years R/o. 420, M-1 Block, Dolphin Jewelo Apartments Fundhar Road, Behind Himalaya Heights, Deopuri, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

1 - Union Of India Through Its Secretary Ministry Of Housing And Urban Poverty Alleviation Government Of India, Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi110011.

¶10

2 - Lic Housing Finance Limited, Corporate Office 131, Maker Tower-F Premises, 13th Floor, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai -400005 Maharashtra.

¶11

3 - Chief Grievance Redressal Officer Executive Director, National Housing Bank, Core-5-A, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.

¶12

4 - The Regional Manager, Lic Housing Finance Limited, 2 Floor, Asha Avenue, Z-1, Zone-1, Mp Nagar, Bhopal -462011.

¶13

5 - Area Branch Manager, Lic Housing Finance Limited, 1st Floor Shyam Market, Pandri, Raipur, District - Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

¶14

... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vinay Nagdev, Advocate (through video conferencing) For Respondent No. 1 : Ms. Anmol Sharma, Central Government Counsel For Respondents No. : Mr. Ayush Verma, Advocate 2, 4 & 5 For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

ORDER ON BOARD

19/11/2025

The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

¶19

“10.1 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to hold that the impugned action on the part of respondent LIC Housing Finance Ltd. pay the subsidy amount from its own account, as the delay is caused by the respondent authority.

¶20

10.2 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief to the petitioner which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice.

¶21

10.3 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), order(s), direction(s) in favour of the petitioner which may deemed fit and proper in the fact and circumstance of the case.”

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner has prayed for multiple relief(s) in the writ petition, however, the prayer of the petitioner at this stage is to direct the Respondents No. 3 & 4 to take decision on the representation which, he has submitted vide application dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure P/5) collectively.

¶23

Learned counsel for the respective respondents submits that as petitioner is not pressing this writ petition on merits and is only seeking a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the representations of the petitioner dated 04.01.2022 (Annexure P/5) collectively, they are having no objection to the limited prayer. If the representation submitted by the petitioner is still pending consideration, it will be considered strictly in accordance with law.

¶24

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

¶25

Taking into consideration, facts and circumstances of the case, submission of counsel for the respective parties, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage directing the Respondents No. 3 & 4 to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner dated 04.01.2022

¶26

¶27

(Annexure P/5) collectively, expeditiously, preferably within a period of 03 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if already not decided.

¶28

With the aforesaid observation and directions, this writ petition stands

¶29

disposed of .

¶30

SHUBHAM Digitallysigned by Sd/-
DEY SHUBHAM
DEY
(Parth Prateem Sahu)
Judge
Dey

¶31

(Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge

Bilal Husain v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilal Husain v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Roshanlal Chahal Vs Panchram @ Pancham Kewat And Ors.

Chand Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Raghuvansh Tiwari (in Person) Vs Commissioner

Nand Kumar Patel Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Mokshika Sahu (Minor) Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Limited Vs Sahashram