1<2^5 c IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 5.50^/2011 PETITIONER .^^ .j'.S^'^ ^^•^Y (^ ^"^ .<"\6 '^••••••""^' RESPONDENTS ^•?""^ /^~^.\ If^ v^n^' M/S G.H.Alimohamed 8s Co. Through - Munir A. Wahab S/o A.Wahab Aged about -51 years (Power of Attorney Holder of petitioner Company) Gurughasidas Ward Kumharpara,Jagdalpur District - Bastar(C.G.) VERSUS ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, Department of urban administration D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) ^-"2. Municipal Corporation ^ Jagdalpur Through ~ Its Commissioner Jagdalpur,District - Bastar(C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (0 N0.5305 OF 2011 M/s G.H. Alimohamed & Co. Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Another m (Writ Petition underArticle 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Vivek Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. Genera! for the State. Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Advocate for the respondent No.2. ORDER (Passed on this 9th day of September, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in exercise of power under Section 328 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, notice was issued by the respondent No.2 on 5-8-2011 (Annexure - P/1), which was received by the petitioner on 23-8-2011. Thereagainst, the petitioner has already made representation/reply/ objection, which is stili pending consideration before the respondent No.2. Learned counsel further submits that the property/structure in dispute should not be demolished till proper decision is taken on the objection/representation of the petitioner, bythe Commissioner, Municipal Corporation. 3. At this juncture, Shri Kachhawaha, learned counset appearing for the respondent No.2, submits that there is no question of demolition of the property/structure in dispute before affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without considering the objection raised by the petitioner, in accordance with law and thereafter, passing the order. The petitioner may be permitted to appear in person to put forward his case. 4. In view of the above, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sdl- Gowri ~ Judge