®g^IR^^H •'^ ^•^Nt- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition No?f^l/2005 PETITIONER ,^' ..^^> ^^^ ^p"" €^' '^y^ ^ RESPONDENTS A \^v ^€^ ^' 4 ^' ,^jS^\ if:/^^' ^e^ ^'t^^...^ '^?s^ Sxiit Sushlla Dubey, Wd/ o Late Shd Krishaa Kuxn.ar Dubey, Aged about 55 years, Occupation ~ Housewife, R/ o House No. 13, Rajkiya Grih Nirnian Saxo.iti, Hanuinaa Nagar (Hanum.an Mandir)»Titurdeeh» Durg(C.G.). Versus- ; 1. State of Chhattisgarh,. Through Secretary, Cooperative Department^ Maatralaya»D. K. S. Bhawaa, Shastri Chowk^ Raipnr (C.G.). 2. Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.). 3. Deputy Regisfarar, Cooperative Societies, Durg(C.G.). 4. Sales Of&cer^ Cooperative SocietieSy Durg (C.G.) 5. Managkig Director,, Awas Saiigli Maiyaclit^ Raipur (C.G.). 6. Rajkiya Housiag Cooperative Society, Tlirougli ite Secretai-y^ Titurdeeh, Durg (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION, CERTIORARI ETC.OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. XI-HC-22 .3T1^T^T RprNiCT^T ^t^^cT 3^r ^iNid^, ^Tfl^i^^ ^rray tra^ WH^IT ^HI^fr 3T^?T .^^^.&.....S<^3^ f^M 3:n^T?^<lT^R:^fN' 8-8-2005 Shri Rajeev Shrivastav^ <=hi^T<n41Ti ^i^<nT^'teI:^'<Ri<-^K ^3Tf^R'W^T , counset for the petitioner. Shri Sandeep Dubey, <3|ovt. Advocate for the State. Meard both the counsejj The case of the petitt<|>ner is that she is restding at ptot No.12, Khasra No.47/8, situated at through Rajkiya Co-operativ^ Hlanuman Nagar, Titurdeeh» Durg and the house was altote>d to the p^titioner's husband by the Housing Boarct Society and the loan was repatd by the petitioner's husband. The petjtioner's husband died on 8-11-90 and since ttien the petitioner is resjdin^ in the house in question. Now, atl of a sudden. respondent No.4 senl Rule 66 of the Co-operativ< pursuance of th©decree dat^d 22-1-99 passed in case No.84-A/Ka/321 year 1997-98 fited against th@ The main grievance c opportunity and without gh/ing decree was passed in the na away as back as on 8-11-90. have represented before resj: notices. Form-0 and Form-A issued under Societies Rules 1962 declarkig thal in late husband of the petjtioner. ff the petitioner js tftat without givuig an any notice to the petitioner, all of a sudden, |n©of the petitioner's husband who passed In the given situation, the petitioner ought to tondent No.4 as well as the authorHy who passed the decree in tiie nam|»of her late husband vytio was not alive on that day. Therefore, ftie petition^r to fSrst approach these authorities and if her grievances are not redres^ed and still she flnds that any legal right is violated. then she can approac authority and obtains necessa ^this Court. !n the meantime, till tljte petitiwier represents before appropriate ry order, in order to enabie her to approach^ "<s m—-- XI-HC-22 'STI^T^T f^rf^^n^T ^iTO^f^T Barve ^^/ ^ ^ •^ °\ ^LT) RTO^TT^WTW 3^ ^l^Krj^, ^Tfl(H^^, f^iTCTgT 3ll^l ^?l«ft ^ 200 f^R^ 3Tr^?T?^T^K^rf?^ -A- th@ respective authority for red^ grantect. Till then respondent^ impugned notices. With ttie direction aforesald, Consequentty, M.(W.)P.| also stand disposed of. Parties are entitled for cer|Bfied copy of this order. |essal of her grie^^nc^, 2 weeka' time is authorities should not proceed with the I, the petition stands disposed of. No.3013/2005 anct IA. No.6795/2005 chi^?<n41Ti ^i^^iT^te^^^K ^3Tf^T3TI^T Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge (^ft^^fe^T)