HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SiNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI S.R. NAYAK, CJ. WRIT PET1TION N0.5880 OF 2005 PETmONER RESPONDENTS Vs. Akhil Bharfiya Guru Ghasidas Mahasamiti, Raipur, through The President Resham Lal Jangade, Aged about 78 years, R/o Janata House No. 1, Indrawati Colony, Raipur, C.G. 1. The State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, G.A.D. Department, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner Munscipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Zone Officer of the Zone no. 7, Nagar Palika Nigam, Amapara, Raipur (C.G.) 4. The Executive Engjneer Municipal Corporation Amapara Swami Atmandnd Ward, Raipur Present Mr. S.C. Verma, Searned counset for the petitioner. Mr. Yashwant Stngh, iearned Govt. Adv., for the State of Chhattisgarh. Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Adv., with Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel for the Raipur Municipal Corporation. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 4 January 2006) This writ petition is djrected against the statutory notice issued by the Divisional Officer, Raipur Municipal Corporation dated 01/10/2005 under Seetion 307 (2-A) ofthe Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act} afSeging that the petitioner has put up construction in the subject property iJSeoally and catiina upon the petitioner to remove unauthorized construct'ion. The petitioner has aiso fiied his reply to the show cause notice. ^l —2-.- (2) The dispute brought before tiie Court bristles with disputed facts. According to the petitioner, h@ hss not contravened any law in putting up the construction. Furthermore, it is welt settled that writ petition is not maintainable against a statutory notice issued by a competent authority. !t is not the case of the petitioner that the Divisionai Officer of the Munidpaj Corporation of Raipur is an incompetent authority to issue the impugned notice. This Court whHe entertaining thts writ petition on 09/12/2005 directed that the status quo that obtained on that date should be mainteined for a period of one month. In that view of the matter, I think that ends of justice would be met by directing further maintenance of status quo for ©period of six weeks from today. I direct accordingly. In tho meanwhilo, it is opon for tho pQtitionor to work out his logal romodies ejther before the statutoryauthorities under the Act or by instituting a suit in the jurisdictional civjf Court. (t is made clear that if the petitioner fails to obtain protective intenm order, in the meanwhile, from the statutory authority or from the cjyil Court, it is open for the authorities of the Raipur Municipa! Corporation to take appropriate steps to remove alleged unauthorized construction in accordance with $aw. There shall be no order as to costs. Sd/- Chief Justice c^