1 2025:CGHC:1939 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 167 of 2025 1 - Prakash Mishra S/o Late Shri Late Brij Bihari Mishra Aged About 76 Years R/o 35 Mahavir City, Rajkishore Nagar, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - The Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Zone Commissioner Zone No. 06, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Building Officer Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Virendra Verma, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Abhijeet Mishra, Advocate. Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board 13/01/2025 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the notice dated 12/12/2024, by which, a notice under Section 309 of the AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2025.01.15 19:06:17 +0530 2 Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 has been issued to the petitioner and directed the petitioner to remove or dismantle the house situated at Ward No.38 Bhatkhande Sangeet Mahavidhyalaya, Bilaspur stating that the property in question is in bad condition and any mishap could be take place. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the notice Annexure P-1 has been designed as per Section 309 of the Act, 1956, however, the contents of the notice is not a notice, the same is to dismantle the house in question. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring the provisions of Section 309 of the Act, 1956 submits that “If it appears to the Commissioner that any building intended or used for human habitation or human occupation for any purpose whatsoever is unfit for such habitation or occupation, he shall give notice in writing to the occupier or to the owner, if the building is not occupied, stating that the building is unfit and signifying his intention to prohibit the further use of such building for such purposes, and calling upon the occupier or owner to state in writing his objections to such prohibition within thirty days from the receipt of the notice. If no objection is submitted by such occupier or owner within the said period, or if the objection stated appears to the Commissioner to be insufficient or not well founded, he may, with the previous approval of the Mayor-in-Council prohibit by an order in writing the further use of such building for human habitation or occupation and shall 3 affix a notice to that effect on a conspicuous part of such building”. In the present case, no such compliance has been made and no notice of 30 days, representation or objection has been made to the petitioner, hence, the notice is not in accordance with law and it deserves to be quashed. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submit that after an inspection made by the Municipal Corporation, the said notice was issued to the petitioner. He would further submit that without filing any objection or representation to the said notice, the petitioner has preferred the writ petition, which is not maintainable at this stage. 4. I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the notice as well as the provisions of Section 309 of the Act, 1956. 5. From perusal of Section 309 of the Act, 1956, it is very clear that the petitioner is entitled for a notice before taking action under Section 310 of the Act, 1956. However, the notice is framed as under Section 309 of the Act, but the contents of notice shows that the petitioner has been directed to remove or dismantle the house standing over the land, hence, the notice Annexure P-1 dated 12/12/2024, which is not in accordance with the provision of Section 309 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 is liable to be and is hereby quashed, however, the liberty is reserved for the respondent/Corporation to issue a proper notice under Section 309 of the Act, 1956 and may pass an appropriate order in 4 accordance with the provisions of Sections 309 or 310 of the Municipal Corporation Act, 1956. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is allowed with the aforesaid liberty given to the respondents authorities. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep