Smriti Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Smriti Nagar Vs Municipal Corporation Bhilai

¶1

1

¶2

AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK

¶3

Digitally signed by AVANISH KUMAR PATHAK Date: 2026.04.29 15:20:27 +0530

¶4

2026:CGHC:19710

¶5

NAFR

¶6

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶7

WPC No. 3964 of 2021

¶8

Smriti Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Smriti Nagar Bhilai Nagar, District Durg, Registration No. 68/11.11.80, Through Its President Rajiv Choubey S/o Late B.K. Choubey Aged About 53 Years, R/o A-79, Street No. 23, Smriti Nagar, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶9

--- Petitioner

¶10

versus

¶11

Municipal Corporation Bhilai Through Its Commissioner, District Durg Chhattisgarh., District : Durg, Chhattisgarh

¶12

--- Respondent

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr. Abhinav Tiwari, Adv. For Respondent : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Adv.

¶14

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board

¶15

28-4-2026

¶16

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs :-

¶17

“10.1) That, the Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to call the entire records pertaining to its case.

¶18

10.2) That, the Hon'ble Court may be kind enough to issue an appropriate writ by directing the Respondent Municipal Corporation for taking decision regarding renewal of colonizer license of the petitioner society within a stipulated time period.

¶19

10.3) That, the Hon'ble Court may be kind enough to issue an

¶20

2

¶21

appropriate writ by directing the respondent Municipal Corporation not to take any coercive step against petitioner society regarding E.W.S. land which is in possession of petitioner society till the issue of renewal of colonizer license pending before Respondent Municipal Corporation.

¶22

10.4) Any other relief or relief(s) which this Hon'ble Court may think proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case may also kindly be granted.”

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, earlier registration of colonizer licence of the petitioner was renewed by respondents vide certificate (Annexure P-1) dated 28-3-2011. Term of aforesaid renewal certificate was completed on 22-9-2012, thereafter petitioner filed an application for renewal of its colonizer licence, but the same has not been decided. Petitioner lastly filed application (Application P-3) dated 27-9-2017 for renewal of its colonizer licence, but the same has not been renewed, rather vide communication (Annexure P-6) dated 7-12-2018, respondent No. 3 issued notice to the petitioner that, it has violated terms of Rule 10 and 11 of the CG Colonizer Registration Rules, 1998, as amended in the year 2013. Learned counsel further submitted that, the petitioner has filed reply vide Annexure P-7 to the communication Annexure P-6, despite that, its colonizer licence has not been renewed yet. He also submitted that, at this stage, this petition may be disposed of directing that after considering the reply Annexure P-7 dated 16-12-2018 filed by the petitioner, the application of the petitioner for renewal of colonizer licence of the petitioner be decided by the respondents at the earliest, till then, they may be directed not to take any coercive step against the petitioner.

¶24

3

¶25

Learned counsel for the respondents would submit that the reply filed by the petitioner as well as the application for renewal of colonizer licence filed by it are under consideration before respondents and the same shall be decided expeditiously.

¶26

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶27

Having considered the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, without entering into merits of the case, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents to decide the application of the petitioner for renewal of colonizer licence by considering the reply (Annexure P-7) to communication (Annexure P-6) issued by the respondents. It is further directed that aforesaid exercise be carried out within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also directed that, till then no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner, if not already taken.

¶28

It is made clear that, after expiry of aforesaid 60 days period, the interim protection granted to the petitioner by this order, shall lose its afficacy.

¶29

With the above observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶30

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of.

¶31

sd/-

¶32

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge

¶33

pathak

Smriti Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Smriti Nagar v. Municipal Corporation Bhilai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smriti Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Smriti Nagar v. Municipal Corporation Bhilai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rims College of Nursing Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Nand Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Devesh Singh Vs Chhattisgarh State Power Transmission Company Limited

Shri Shyam Ji Rice Mill Vs Competent Authority

Smt. Bimla Bai Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Laxmi Sahu Vs The State of Chhattisgarh