INT !CHHA'ITISGARH l/ HE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR w. P. N034040F zoos PETITIONERS Rajeev Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti, a Co-operative Housing Society bearing Registration No. RPR/90/82— 83 having its Office at Katora Talab, Raipur, Tahsii & DistRaipur (Chhattisgarh) f through its Chairman. Choith Ram Bajaj, S/o Late Jathanand Bajaj, aged about 68 years, Chairman Rajiv Grih Nirman Sahakari Samiti & R/o Katora Taiab, Raipur, Tahsii and District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS y State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Town & Country Planning, Mantraiaya, Dau Kaiyan Singh Bhawan,‘ Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Director, Town & Country Planning, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Joint Director, Town & Country Planning, District Office Raipur ,ChhattisgarhX WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CERTIORARI MANDAMUS PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERS: RESPONDENTS \Q L XI-HC—ZZ HW,W,W WW ,‘ 9: Shri Manindra Shrivastava, Sr. Counsel with Shri Afroz Khan, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Sandeep Dubey, Govt. Adv. for the State. Heard. The case of the petitroner is that the petitioner is a society which undertook the construction work of a housing colony on the land situated in Khasra No.389, Village Tikrapara, Raipur and also land in Khasra Nos.42, 43 8r. 44 in Village Puraina, Raipur. The map was got approved from therTown 8a Country Planning Department and the colony was being developed as per approved plan of the respondents. However, a complaint was made by one Bhajandas Haldani on which certain 61, actions were initiated, even a letter was sent to the police station concerned for registering a criminal case against the petitioner society and in the meantime, respondent No.3 without giving any opportunity of hearing issued a notice dated 29.6.2005 (Annexure P—l) to the petitioner in response to which a detailed pointwise reply has been filed by the petitioner on 18.7.2005. Thereafter, nothing has been heard from the side of respondent No.3. Learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner submits that action is being initiated without giving any show cause notice and Without giving any opportunity of MW, WWN9$wW 1H 2005‘ W mam {Em-m Wan—W Wmmw ’ WW§E§TW v %ax%wan%$1 29.7.2005. XI—HC-ZZ I (Annexure P-7) Wh‘ICE is contrary to prin further submits that res; c0nsider{ths reply filed by same in accordance with counsel has no objection. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having considered the facits and circumstances of the 3 by learned Sr. Counsel for ' No.3 is directed to consider )etitioners on 18.7.2005 in ed 29.6.2005 (Annexure P—l) mutation dated 29.4.2005 lance with law and if the any document in support of :aring that may also be. given issing the final order and till 1e representation, respondent an the Annexure P—l dated casc and submission mad1 the petitioners, respondem the reply filed by the 1 response to the notice dat and decide the 'repre: 111 accon petitioners want to furnish their reply and personal ht to the petitioners before p: the decision is given on t1 No.3 should not act up< 29.6.2005. With the direction a disposed of. Consequently, M.(W No,6467/05 also stand dis; Certified copy as per 1 ciples of natural justice. He :ondent No.3 is required to the petitioner and decide the law, to which learned State foresaid, the petition stands .)P. LA. . No.2877/05 8a )osed of. ,r Ln 'ules. Sd/— k L.C.Bhadoo Judge firkieaeal i