1 2025:CGHC:31850 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3520 of 2025 1 - Smt. Vimla Devi Jaiswal S/o Shri Har Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 54 Years R/o Village Nawagaon, Ward No. 5, Police Station Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food And Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - Collector, Korba, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Tahsildar, Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 4 - State Bank Of India Through Its Authorized Officer Cum Chief Manager, S A R B Sector-1, Bhilai, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) 5 - Chhattisgarh State Co-Operative Marketing Federation Through Its Managing Director, 6th Floor, Tower C, Cbd Sector-21, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 6 - District Marketing Officer, Korba, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 7 - M/s Om Sai Rice Mill Through Its Proprietor Shri Goldy Jaiswal S/o Shri Harprasad Jaiswal, R/o Village Nawagaon, Ward No. 5, P.S.- Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 8 - Shri Goldy Jaiswal S/o Shri Har Prasad Jaiswal, Aged About 33 Years R/o Village Nawagaon, Ward No. 5, P.S. Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 9 - Ms. Priyanka Chandra, Tahsildar, Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) 10 - State Bank Of India Through Branch Manager, Katghora Branch, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudeep Verma, Advocate For Respondent No. 5 & 6 For Respondent No. 4 : : Mr. Mateen Siddiqui along with Mr. Harshmander Rastogi, Advocate Mr. Pranjal Agrawal, Advocate 2 For State : Ms. Upasna Mehta, Dy. G. A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 10/07/2025 1. By way of this petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for following relief(s): “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by quashing the Notice of Recovery dated 30.05.2025 and Notice of Auction dated 16.06.2025 (received on 20.06.2025) (Annexure P/1) issued by Tahsildar, Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.) in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Respondent Authorities may kindly be directed to firstly decide the pending appeal of Goldy Jaiswal and they may be further directed to restrain from proceeding with recovery from petitioner or her family members, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, the respondents may kindly be restrained from attaching and auctioning the property of the petitioner, in the interest of justice. 10.4 That, the Hon’ble Court may kindly punish the Respondent No. 9 for wilful disobedience of Hon’ble Court’s order dated 20.08.2015 and exemplary cost 3 of Rs. 20,00,000/- be imposed upon her for acting malafide against the petitioner and misusing her administrative powers against the petitioner and her family members from time to time. 10.5 Any other relief which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioner may kindly be passed. 10.6 Cost of the petition may be awarded.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 21.04.2025 is bad and unsustainable in law. The Tahsildar has ignored the fact that the land which has been ordered to be auctioned in the notice dated 16.06.2025 is although in the name of the petitioner but the same is Hindu Undivided Property as the same is purchased from the income of Hindu Undivided Family as petitioner had no income and jointly used by members of the family. 3. Learned State Counsel opposed the contentions made by the counsel for the petitioner and supports the notice of recovery and auction. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 5. Perusal of record shows that the petitioner had filed a writ petition bearing WPC No. 646 of 2025 before this Court which was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.02.2025 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Again, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition challenging the notice of recovery dated 30.05.2025 and notice of auction dated 16.06.2025 issued by Tahsildar, Katghora, District- Korba (C.G.). 4 6. Admittedly, the properties are in the name of the petitioner. However, the petitioner claims that the properties are Hindu Undivided Family property. Perusal of Annexure P/8 reveals that the petitioner herself has filed the application before the Court of Tahsildar, Katghora for the purpose of recovery of bank loan and market loan and she has raised no objection for auction of her properties. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that an appeal has been preferred from the agreement by the petitioner before the State Government against the order of Court of Collector, Korba (C.G.) on 23.02.2015 which is still pending. In this regard, the learned counsel for the State contended that appeal may be decided within 30 days from today. Therefore, it is directed that the appeal filed by the petitioner before the State Government against the order of Court of Collector, Korba (C.G.) on 23.02.2015 shall be decided within 30 days from today. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the present petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE Madhurima