I wijvgk IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT Writ Petition c No. Qé of 2009 @igia‘ggm pFTiTIONERS: BILASPUR 1. Alok Gupta, S/o Shri Borilal Gupta, Aged about 33 years, Occupation Business, R/o Janakpur Road, i Ward No.13, Takhatpur Tahsil Takhatpur, Distt. Biiaspur (CI3-.) 2. Sadhuram Paul, S/o Shri Loknath, Aged about 40 years, Occupation Agricuiture, R/o Village Padariya, i Tahsii Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) - Versus - 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, RF§PONDENTS: Raipur (C.G.) 2. Director, Urban Administration and Development, Raipur, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Collector, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Nagar Panchayat, Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.), Through its Chief Municipal Officer. , 5. Presient, d Nagar Panchayat, Takhatpur, Distt.‘ Bilaspur (C.G.) 6. Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) w/ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 ,OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE ‘OF APPROPRIATE WRITIWRITS, DIRECTIONS ETC! I THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS‘ CERTIQRARI ANDIQR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OF LIKE NATURE WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTIFUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agmhotri, J. Present: Shri Sameer Shrivastava: Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Pane} Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1 to 3. Shri AS.Kaehhwaha, Advocate for the respondent No. 4 to 6. ()RDER §0RAL2 (Pasged on O2“ day of AugusL 201 1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for ailotment of shops constructed by the respondent No. 4, auction proceeding took place on 10.07.2009 and on 04.08.2009 whereunder allocation of shops were decided. The alleged auction as aforestated were held, without giving wide pubiicity of the auction as required under the provisions of Rule 4 of the Madhya Pradesh Municipaiities (Transfer of lmmovable Property) Rules, 1996. Thus, the auction proceeding is bad in law and is Vitiated. 2. Shn' Kachhwaha, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No. 4 to 6 submits that though, auction has taken place but no allotment of shops has been made till date. Before the alleged auction on 10.07.2009 and 04.08.2009, new mode of publicity by beat of drums was done in the urban area of Takhatpur. Rule 4 of the Rules, 1996 provides that 11 a transfer of immovable property is to be made by public auction or by inviting offers. advertisement shall be made in a widely published neWspaper 15 a HIGH COURT OF CHHA’ITISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 5536 of2009 PETITIONER Alok Gupta & Another. VERSUS RESPONDENTS . : State ofChhattisgarh & Others g: days prior to auction or the last date of invitation of offers. In the case on hand, the same has not been done. Thus, the auction proceedings held on 10.07.2009 and 04.08.2009 are violative not only of Rule 4 ofthe Rules, 1996, but it is also violative of Article 14 ofthe Constitution of India. Thus, the entire auction proceedings dated 10.07.2009 and 04.08.2009, as aforestated, are quashed. However, liberty is reserved to the Nagar Panchayat, Takhatpur to proceed for re-auctjon of the shops for allotment, in accordance with the law, including provisions ofRules, 1996. The petition is accordingly allowed. No order asto Gong. ‘ Sd/— . ‘ j SatishK.Agnihotr1 ‘ l , live