Writ Petition No C§7?’of 2001 J 'A\ E V/iVIadhu Memon'al Hospital Ltd. 9/2 Motila Nehru Naga 3, l r Bhilai, CG aregistera ampany 'under Company Act 1956 , through its Chairman, Shri Balwant Rai Jain s/otShLi Hilain r/o39/2, Matilal Nehru Nagar Bhilai, CG. Vergijs 1. State of Chhatisgarh , through Secretary Department of Lok Nirman (Public Works ) Awas (Housing) and Nagria Prashasan ( Urban Administration) avam Vikas ‘Vibhag . DKS Bhavan , Raipur . PTITIONER : “ d C % (2/ U/ 2. Municipal Corporation ,Bhilai. (CG) through Commissioner, Municipal Corporation ,Bhilai. PETFTEGN WEE ARTECLE 226 OF THE CONS'ETE‘UTEGI‘Q CF ENEHA FéER A W’RET QF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS ETC.ETC. i n,o umgwt 3 <1\V\ §€i§3i‘% €GU§? G? €§§H§?T3§G£§H i3? Eé£§i3§i§§i M WR§? FET§T§ON M1 3??? {33F 2%? Versus ‘ “at Petitiener Madhu Memeriai Hoepitai Ltd. ResmMems Siate of Chhattisgarh & amther WRIT PETiTiON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CGNSTITUTIGN OF iNDiA {3% : Hon’bia Mr. $aiish K. Agnihmri, a2} Present :— Shri Sanjay KL’Agrawei with Shri Aehieh Shtivastava, Advocates foa' ihe petifioner. Shri AS‘Kachhawaha; Dy.‘Advoca£e Genera for ihe Sfaie. Shré Satyawan Agrawal, Advocate for ihe resgaondent N02. M‘ M $R33ER §0R§Lj \ (Passed on 21$! day 9f July, 2010) Chaiienge in this petition is to the arde? daied 105/2001 (Annsxure P-S), whereby the Secretary, State o? Chhattisgarh, Urban Administra‘iion & Devemiamem Department cancei§ed ihe almimeni‘ af ‘36 acre3 of éand ’to the petii‘ioner. Learnea counsei for ihe petitioner submit$ that the petitiener impugns the orde¥ on the grcund that pursuani tame nctice céa‘éed 27/8/1998, t§1e peiiiioner has §r€§erred hi$ rep§y or: 215i2GG1 (ifmnexure P4) raising specificaiiy gmunds 5 & 6. Learned ommseé subm§ts that specific poinixe raised in respect of the fact i’nai the simiiar ia'nci was aiietied to Chanduiai Chandi'akar Memoriai Haspiiai and Dr. Gurunath in the year i995 ai the raie of Rs. 3i- per 3q.fi.,hae not been considered by the Secretary in his order dated ‘i G/5f2i’3m . On eerusai, i have found that there is no discuseien with reeem t the greunde raised in para 5 <3 $ e ‘e Wig; eetec 322$?» tiie :1( LL x , m 5/ by the petttioner, which appears to be reievant and coutd not have been Hghtly ignored. Paras 5 & 6 read as unéer : w$aWWs‘q-%Ez%snwmmmw% s/—Wu§1‘a7f§€%uq=§,§r%w%w%§ 5/—mu%a&v§am%€%wfia’m; EfraiT W m‘é’g‘2WWa W%$Wmmu€5 w§f€w%11§1%(1)§v%%wm%m§r§ GWanWW$§amfi‘1oW@E§€€a Wmn(2)%mmfimwmw Gram—$%R‘j T'Engm Wu ma f W"‘l gym-é €iW—31§@13—14mT%%§Wm%l W $WW$WHqW agew‘; W4 Eras Em Era W 3711/W‘ 3W. (3) W 18 mi 1991 W4Wfaa§mzmwa W'cp 3m/92—93 W ‘r 15 Iréi ”1992' WI r ~5 62W Em} WWW m , W WA W'w 23 n’g‘ 1992 WW—s a‘a W fq' W é‘’l aé1995%§z$§32%3nmmafm€rq$aa§w Wm WW ,J awam qTz§rW$i W' atrial W$Wav§mmia W r1 —7$meea1:i%iei‘t%meieiu&tie mm Wewwwwseme “xiir-im %i ) ti, m view of i‘ne foregoing, it §s expedient and necessary to remit back the matter to the Secretary! Principal Secreiary, State of Chhattisgarhi Urban Administration Deveiopment Department. 5. Learned counsei for the State and respondent No.2/ Corperatton submtt that it is true that the Secretary has not considered and discussed the issues raised in the reply and passed n0 order in respect of the said points. WW W§ihout expressing any op§n§on on the mems of the case} the impugned order dated 10-5-2001 is quashed. Hawever, Hberiy ie reserved to the Secreiary/ Principm Semetary, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Urban Administraiion & Development Department, to reconsider the matter afresh and paes appropriate order in accordance with law on merits and an its own perspective, 0n the basis of repiy dated 2/5t2001 (Annexure P-4) fited by the petitioner after affording proper opportunity or hearing to aii the parties concerned. Needtui may be done within a period of 3 months! having regard to the facts situation of the case that the matter is pending consideration in this Court since 2001. ()J §§ as to coets. . Sdl- Ashok Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ‘ This petition is accordingiy aiiowed to the above extent. No order