Singie Eanch @ IN THE HIGH COURT ‘OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION No.4 é53goo4 PETITIONER Smt. Asha Gupta, W/o Shri B.P. Gupta, aged about 61 yrs., R/o- B-l 1/5, Indira Nagar, Lucknow, C / o Shri Raj Bahadur Kashyap, Adarsh Nagar Balvidaya Mandir, Gandhi Chowk, Rajpur, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS RESPONDENTS /:/ 1. Municipal Corporation through: Commissioner Municipal Raipur. Town Planning Authority, (Nagar Nivash Adhikari) Municipal Corporation Raipur, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTCLE 226 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ,,ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDUMUS CERTIORARY, AND/OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OF LIKE NATURE XLHC—«7 8 o Wiq§§3t§~t mm 31mm (We?) Wmm U7. 1.2005 7x4 m zoo 31$! $1 W am mam WWW§IWW $3ifatranw the case is taken up for hearing. O11 a mention being made, Shli Kishore Bhaduri, CO ‘nsel for the petitioner. ed this petition with a prayer that in accordance with the pmvisions' of The. petitioner has prefe respondents be directsd to ac Sech‘on 309 &. 310 of the M Bn'ef facts leading to of this petition, as mentioned in the petition; are that the petitioner s ownerof the hOuse bearing No.9] 1 1, 9/ 1'2, 9/ 13 5r. 9/ 13 situated house was gifted to the petiti deed dateti 27.9.1971. On 1.5. on the petitioner saying that sin :e the building has become dilapidated and unsafe for human habitation, same is required to be demolished which demolition work will be carried n. Copy of the notice is Annexme P-3 ing the notice the petitioner requested mises and in due course of time most premises, even the petitioner has also 93, which was in her possession and was given to the respondents vide Annexure P—4. Accordingly, respondent No.2 requested the Additional dated 10.3.1999 that to make Coilector, :.,Raipur vide letter arrangement for vacating the building from the tenants, since the building has become dilapidatec and unfit for human habitation, but no action has been taken and n( thing has happened thereafter. a by the petitioner herself, faih‘ng out by the Municipal Corporatio to the writ petition. After receiv all the tenants to vacate the pre of the tenants have vacated the vacated the portion on 30.5.19 intimation to the said effect ‘ ‘p al Corporation Act. t Budapara Ward, Raipur. The said r by her father through a registered 1993 respondent No.2 served a notice e o B ~ yv \ Xl-HC—7 8 WW .................... . ..............................m 200 mw(%€ga§§) WEW EERRH%H& $ * '2 ” WW§WW wmm $afi%m ' “she Gama to know that one tenant namelv Shekhar Chanel Shn'vastava, i i who is working in thE Municipal Corporation, Raipur is not vacating the premjsss and being the employee of the Corporation, the Municipal Corpomtion is also not taking ‘any action against. him. Therefore, respondents be dixected to take ‘ tion in accordance with pmvisions of Section 309 £35 310 of Municipal ‘ rporation Act. I have heard learned coun .1 for the petitioner. Leanned counsel for the titioner argued that respondents be directed to demolish the buildin in View of the proviSions of Sections 309 8n 310 of the Act. I But, in the first instance, sponeibiEty lies on the shoulders of the petitioner to demolish the b ‘ ding after receiving the notice from the respondents Corporation. E en she can herself act according to the provisions of the Act and if y tenant is not vacating the building then she is entitled to take co e of remedy available to her under the law. In View of the above, I do ot find any substance in this petition, same is liable to be dismissed , d it is, accordingly, dismissed at the i admission stage itself. l ll , . Sd/- i l L.C.BHADOO Judge Q§§1~~ L * 3 i