1 2025:CGHC:52032 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5541 of 2025 Amaljot Developers A Registered Partnership Firm Having Its Principal Office At House Of Bhupendra Singh Thakur Ward Number 48 Number 92 Mahamaya Chowk Shivghat Sarakanda Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh Through Its Partner Rajendra Motwani Son Of Late Dularam Motwani Aged About 41 Years R/o Dhanmandi Road Torwa Chowk Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Town And Country Planning, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Through Its Commissioner, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Joint Director Town And Country Planning, Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Superintendent Of Police Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 7 - Piyush Gangwani S/o Late Ramchandra Gangwani Aged About 19 Years R/o Main Road, Torwa, Police Station Torwa, District Bilaspur (C.G.). ---- Respondents 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Arijit Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA. For Respondent-Municipal Corporation : Mr. SS Baghel, Advocate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 17.10.2025 1. With the consent of the parties, matter is heard finally. 2. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “10. RELIEF (S) SOUGHT: i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition and Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the Respondent No.4, Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, suspending the Colonizer License of the Petitioner firm; ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the Respondent authorities to Declare that there has been no suppression on the part of the Petitioner firm and that the action of the Respondent Corporation is arbitrary, illegal, and in violation of the principles of natural justice. iii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the Respondent authorities to forthwith restore the Colonizer License of the Petitioner and permit it to continue its lawful business operations; and iv. Any other relief(s) in favor of Petitioners as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case with cost.” 3 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that present writ petition is directed against the arbitrary, illegal and one-sided action of the concerned respondent-authorities, whereby the Colonizer License granted to the petitioner-firm has been suspended vide order dated 10.10.2025. Said order has been passed without issuing any show cause notice, affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner or in complete violation of the principles of natural justice as well as Rule 5(i) & Rule 7 of the Chhattisgarh Nagar Palik Nigam Tatha Nagar Palika (Registration of Coloniser, Terms and Conditions) Rules, 2013 (for short, ‘Rule of 2013’). Learned Counsel further contended that an application for grant of license was submitted by the petitioner on 05.02.2024, fulfilling all necessary criteria and conditions and at that time no FIR was registered against the Petitioner. Thereafter, on 08.4.2025, FIR was registered against the petitioner for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of the IPC. Hence, petitioner has came-up before this Court with aforesaid prayer. Learned Counsel also draw attention to this Court that Narendra (one of the co-accused) has filed the SLP (Crl.) No.8561/2025 (Narendra Versus State of Chhattisgarh) before the Apex Court, on which, the Apex Court has passed the following order/direction: “Para 6. In the meantime, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with FIR No.149 of 2025 dated 08.04.2025 registered at P.S. 4 Torwa, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, subject to his cooperation in the investigation/trial.” 4. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that petitioner has already filed the reply before the concerned Commissioner, Municipal Corporation. 5. On putting specific query whether the Municipal Corporation has issued show-cause-notice to the petitioner before suspending his licence, learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation contended that ‘probably not’. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the writ petition. 7. For ready reference, Rules 5 & 7 of the Rules of 2013 reads as under: "5. Disqualifications for registration. - Application for registration shall be liable for rejection in one or more of the following cases:- (a) Any information given in the application is not correct or is incomplete; (b) The applicant, or any partner or trustee or director, as the case may be, has been - (i) convicted by a court in India of an offence punishable under Section 153-A or Section 171-E or Section 171-F or sub-section (2) or sub- section (5) of Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (No. 45 of 1860) or under the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 (No.22 of 1955) or under Section 125 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (No.43 of 5 1951), or Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (No.28 of 1961) or Section 10 or Section 11 of the Chhattisgarh Local Authorities (Electoral Offences) Act, 1964 (No. 13 of 1964), or for any cognizable offence punishable under any current Law of the land unless a further period of six years has elapsed since his release after undergoing the sentence; (ii) sentenced to imprisonment for a period of not less than two years; (c) If the registration certificate of the applicant was rejected earlier under rule 7 or 14; (d) If a competent court has declared the applicant as a person of unsound mind.” 7.“Cancellation of Registration Certificate. -(1) The Competent Authority on his own motion or on information from any source and for reasons to be recorded in writing, may cancel the registration certificate for contravention of any of the term, condition or terms or conditions or any provision of the Act or these rules: Provided that no registration certificate shall be cancelled unless a reasonable opportunity of being heard is given to the holder of the registration certificate. (2) An appeal against any order of cancellation of registration certificate under sub-rule (1) may be filed before the State Government within thirty days from the date of the order of cancellation of registration certificate, in the form of a simple application, stating therein the grounds for appeal and attaching a copy of 6 the order passed under this rule. (3) The appeal under sub-rule (2) shall be considered and disposed off by the State Government in accordance with the principles of natural justice within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the appeal.” 8. In view of above discussion, it is clear that vide order dated 10.10.2025 concerned respondent-authorities has suspended the Colonizer License of the petitioner-firm without issuing any show cause notice or affording opportunity of hearing to him, which is against the principles of natural justice and complete violation of Rules of 5 & 7 of the Rules, 2013, however, it is not a final order of the respondent-Municipal Corporation, therefore, writ petition is disposed of at this stage directing respondent No.4 to decide the matter of the petitioner strictly in accordance with relevant rule/law/regulation within an outer limit of ‘30 days’ from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Meanwhile, effect and operation of the order dated 10.10.2025 (Annexure P-7) shall remain stayed. 9. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case, respondent No.4 shall decide the matter of the petitioner on its own merits without influenced of this order. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-