1 2025:CGHC:4019 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3610 of 2025 1 - Archana Devi Jain W/o Mahaveer Prasad Jain Aged About 58 Years R/o Paatni Villa, Street-18, Smriti Nagar, Motilal Nehru Nagar, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.), Owner Of Archana Tower, G.E. Road, Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, Post Office - Rakhi, District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - District Regularization Committee Durg Constituted Under Section 4(1) Of The Chhattisgarh Anadhikrit Vikas Ka Niyamitikaran Adhiniyam, 2002, Through Its Chairman Cum Collector, District - Durg (C.G.) 3 - Joint Director Cum Secretary District Regularization Committee Durg, Constituted Under Section 4(1) Of The Chhattisgarh Anadhikrit Vikas Ka Niyamitikaran Adhiniyam, 2002, Town And Country Planning, Durg (C.G.) 4 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District - Durg (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Shri Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate For State : Mrs. Akanksha Verma Dabhadker, P.L. For Respondent-Municipal : Shri H.B. Agrawa, Sr. Advocate along with Mrs. Preeti Yadav, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 11/08/2025 1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners with following Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.08.13 11:29:07 +0530 2 relief(s): “10.1. That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire record pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction thereby directing the respondents to issue regularization certificate to the petitioner with regard to the property in question ie Archana Tower or This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order/direction thereby directing the respondents to decide the pending matter of the petitioner for grant of regularization certificate within a stipulated period of one month. 2. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s.), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved with the illegal arbitrary inaction of the respondents whereby on one hand they are not issuing regularization certificate of construction to the petitioner despite the same, certificate being issued to other similarly situated constructions and on the another hand the respondents are not permitting the petitioner to carry out business activity in the entire building/commercial complex by not issuing necessary permission and NOC. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is pertinent to mention that certain minor irregularities have been found in the commercial complex of the petitioner, thus the petitioner have moved an application under Section 5 of the CG Anadhikrti Vikas Ka Niyamitikaran Adhiniyam, 2022 for regularization of those minor irregularities of constructions, pursuant to which the petitioner has undertaken to deposit the 3 requisite penalty fees as will be charged from her. He further submits that the Commissioner of the respondent-Corporation vide its letter dated 02.04.2024 have informed the Joint Director of Town & Country Planning Department, Durg, C.G. that 19 such cases of regularization have been found to be eligible for regularization and have also communicated the calculation sheet of the penalty to be charged upon the concerned occupiers as a penalty for regularization, in which the petitioner’s name also finds place at Sr. No. 14. Further, the Committee has also regularized all such similarly positioned proposal vide decision in meeting dated 30.05.2023. The case of the petitioner for regularization is still pending active consideration before the authorities. 4. Learned counsel for respondent No. 4 submits that Municipal Corporation has already recommended the case of the petitioner for regularization before the Regularization Committee. 5. Learned counsel for respondent-State contended that respondent No. 2 & 3 is ready to decide the matter for regularization in accordance with law. 6. I have learned counsel for the parties and perused the records with utmost circumspection. 7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, instead of keeping this petition pending, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 & 3 to decide the case of the petitioner for regularization (Annexure P/4) in accordance with law within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of 4 copy of this order. 8. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case. 9. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti