N5 i:. 3') (rtft<TO{ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH JODICATURE AT BIIASPUR w .P.NO. '2^&0 /2003. PETITIONER -•'""cS^" <»>^' ^^ &»'•' \^^-"" Shlv Prasad Gupta, aged about 38 years, son of Shri Sarju Prasad Gupta, resident of LI.G. 72 Shailendra Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. Municipal Corporation Raipur, a Body Constituted under the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 at Ralp-ar. 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through : Secretary/ Local Self Government, Chhattisgarh, Raipur, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) // ./^^^ .f 'y' —nua.,^' ' '• PETITION ONDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FQR ISSUANCE OF WS.I1 IN FORM OFMANDAMUS OR IN ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE FORM THAT MAY BE DEEM APPROPRIATE UNDER THE FAGTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE :ASE OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OK ORDER. Petitioner respectfully begs to submit as under: PARTICUIARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER : - The particulars of tbe petitioner are given in the cause title of the petitlon. aa t'i -1-. XI-HG-22 . SII^t^iT •f?Ti?;3ii^r sb*1 ^ii^f L-, '^s? "4Wls'f<<, a^fl'ie, fawi'ay sn^T TH^T _^^^.S!JJS^. <^@- NI*ICTI aiflicb "n 200 ^^s ?'siiyr yf?n 30/08/2003:- Heard Shri S.S. Agrawal co^insel for the petition.er fildd By this writ petition Constitutionof India the petitione^r mandamus commanding the resp4ndent petitioner in plbt No.0248 and a|| building. ^ The case of the petition^i bearing No.C)248 situated in Shi under the authority of respoitdent Authority. The petitioner had Kanhaiyalal Awadhiya son of Shri said plot of then Raipur Devel succeeded by respondent/Author|ty, 24/11/1984 (Annexure-P/1). Kan^iyalal of Plfft No.b248 of^the then Raipt been succeeded by r'espondent^vic|e 06/08/1982. Under the terms Awadhiya - the lessee was autl^orized granted to another person. Ex< tronsfer ismade wqs required to case, the petitioner purchgsed th< tsr^id^l'i "^pE^ff '^"fet^ <P?it$,i< ^;3rfiOT3lI^[ , under Art-icles 226/227 of the has prayed for issuance of a writ of idents to record the name of the proved the map for constryction of r is that he has purchased a plot lilendra Nagar, Raipyr which comes / r^n;.-..- rs.—,...!-**.,.,.*..* / r^Uipur uesyeivprnisrli ^urchased the aforesaid plot from ISunnalal who was the lessee of the |»pment Authority which has been vide registered sale deed dofed Awadhiya wha was the lessee [jr Development Authority which has lease deed (Annexure-P/2) dated conditions of the leaseKanhaiyalal to transfer the said lease (ept thoct the lessee to whom the lintimate the said trdnsfer. In this land frpm KQnbaiyal°! (fffd intimats^ yicje 1 anld ^^vy.^ ^ XI-HC-22 '3;Eg'i|l'i|l<'l<4,»'qlMfis,,ft<'ii'y'i<. an^T 'qa^? W<l?n tli'llch •^ 200 3ii^?i^a R;'l" Sfflfw ^^t^) ^I^t • sn^iTOKwgfta -a- <til<)ii'<<il'<, tiW<-if'?ftc3 <I^lt$l< •^siPanan^t . Copy of sui^charge cerl'ificate to the then Raipur Development ALJthority the petitioner had also paid the tifansfer development Authority under Rule Gram ViveshViksit Bhumiyan 6rih4n Viniyamon Niyam, 1974. the petitioner as Annexure-P/3. petitioner had also paid Rs.350/-a4 moyadan ipplication for transfer of| 10/10/1991. While the application| suit was pending between Dr. Deepjik to the same plot with the erstwhile)Rttipi which the petitiohter had no knotjiledge Therefore, the name of +he /' . . - • •..•"• ".';- .'•'• • . .' - ' petitioner came to knouu thdt resf)ondent the plaintiff in thatsuit about whi|ch The petitioner has been making ef) Municipal Corporation but he failed^ on the part of respondent No.l. •t-hority. The predecessor in title of fees to the erstwhile Raipur 37 of Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Bhawan Tatha Anyd Sanrachna Ke has been filed by The predecessor in titleof the fees on 11/09/1984. The p&titioner his nameand paid necessaryfees on of the petitioner wias pending a civil Sharma and another with respect Rttipur bevelopment Authority about but came to know recently. Mtioner wos not mutoted but the No.l had compromised viiith ch the petitioner has no knowledge. Fort- to get his name mutated in the ^to getbecause of the arbitrory act Learned counsel appearing spite of the repeated representt-ations Corporation is not respecting and c^>r or the petitioner submits that in the respondent Municipal )nsidering the request made by the ["M ^ XI-HC-22 sH^?i^n K-)i?h svvjifi WRW^fSff^ ^e? ;qrai?ra, y^Utti^, w<?i)«'i< ^n^rtRw *n*fen %ww "g^ 200 petitjoner. The petitioner ha; 28/05/2002. , Hming heard th& leamed and having regard to the facts pefitioner is allowed to make a re within ten doys from today to rept'esentatipn of the petitioner, same within a period of thirty di represen'totion and pass on appro petitioner. With the above observcrtior filed latest reppesentation on touns&l appearing for the petitioner faid circumstances of the case, the resentotion raising his all grievances [•espondent No.t. On receiving the respondent N0.1 shall consider the (ys from the date of receipt of the iriate order <md communicate to the ^^•44M- ^rafepih'tnat"'? fyS <Fai+<y< ^StfWISD^t , the petition is disposed of. Sd/- ._- L.C. Bhadoo Judge L $^^A [•^^fe^ ' ^g^S^^B®