1 2025:CGHC:50560 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5315 of 2025 1 - Santosh Kumar Mishra S/o Late Shatrughan Prasad Mishra Aged About 52 Years Owner And Manager Of Santosh Diary Address Shop No. 1 Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 2 - Jitendra Manwani S/o Madhav Lal Manwani Aged About 50 Years Owner And Manager Of Ganesh Book Depot, Address Shop No. 2 Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 3 - Ravi Preetwani S/o Kanhaiya Lal Preetwani Aged About 33 Years Owner And Manager Of Yug Mobiles Address Shop No. 4 Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 4 - Sandeep Kumar Pal S/o P.B. Pal Aged About 50 Years Owner And Manager Of Vinayak Enterprises Address Shop No. 5 Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 5 - Vivek Sahu S/o P.R. Sahu Aged About 54 Years Owner And Manager Of Fair And Glow Parlour Address Shop No. 6 Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 6 - Gurmeet Singh Rajpal S/o Late Amar Singh Rajpal Aged About 64 Years Owner And Manager Of Raunak Tent House Address Shop No. -7, 8, 9, Bhukhand No. C1-01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) 7 - Tejpal Chaudhary S/o Devraj Chaudhary Aged About 46 Years Owner And Manager Of Suruchi Restaurant House Address Shop No. 10 Bhukhand No. C1- 01 Ganesh Complex Niharika Marg, Korba, District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Development And Administration Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Korba District- Korba (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Korba District- Korba (C.G.) Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.10.10 17:33:39 +0530 2 4 - Rajkumari Ashrani Wd/o Late Ashok Kumar Asrani Aged About 62 Years R/o Plot No. 69, Icrc Transport Nagar, Korba District- Korba (C.G.) 5 - Soniya Lacchwani W/o Siddharth Lacchwani Aged About 40 Years R/o Plot No. 69, Icrc Transport Nagar, Korba District- Korba (C.G.) 6 - Suman Agrawal W/o Narendra Kumar Agrawal Aged About 50 Years R/o Hig - 129 Maharana Pratap Chowk Korba District- Korba (C.G.) 7 - Arvind Kumar Agrawal S/o Balram Agrawal Aged About 48 Years R/o House No. 47, Ward No. 15, Station Road Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Otwani, Sr. Adv., and Mr. Shobhit Koshta, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Upasana Mehta, Dy. A.G. For Respondent- No. 3 : Mr. Soumitra Kesharwani, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 10/10/2025 1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief(s):- 10.1 This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and set-aside the impugned order dated 11/9/25 (Annexure P-1) in the interest of justice. 10.2) That, Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ and direct the respondent authorities to decide the petitioners representation in respect of purchase of disputed land within such outer limit as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and may kindly be pleased to direct that no coercive actions shall be taken against the petitioners till final decision of the instant matter in the interest of justice 10.3) This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records of the instant case, for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.4) This Hon'ble Court may also be pleased to grant the cost of the petition to the petitioners. 10.5) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deem fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioners in the interest of justice. Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.10.10 17:33:27 +0530 3 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 6/12/1993, a lease was executed by respondent no. 3 with one Late Ashok Kumar Ashrani with respect to Disputed land. It is relevant to mention herein that the lease was executed for a period of 30 years subject to further renewal. From the Year 1996 to 1997, in the 11 shops constructed on the disputed land, tenancy was created in favor of the petitioners and one Narendra Kumar Agrawal by Late Ashok Kumar Asrani and subsequently after his death the tenancy was continued and rent agreement was executed by the petitioners with the wife and legal heir of Late Ashok Kumar Asrani namely Rajkumari Asrani in the year 2021. The tenancy was for a period of 30 years the same has expired on 6/12/23 and thereafter, the petitioners came to know that Rajkumari Asrani is trying to sell the disputed land to third party who is related to one of the tenant namely Narendra Kumar Agrawal and hence, the petitioners was constrained to file an application before the Rent Control Authority seeking protection of tenant interest as per the provision of Section 12 (7) of CG Rent Control Act and prayed that no third party interest shall be created. Thereafter, the Learned Rent Control Authority vide order dated 19/5/25 rejected the application of the petitioners against the order dated 19/5/25, the petitioners preferred the appeal before the learned Rent Control Tribunal, Raipur and the matter is pending consideration. In the meanwhile vide representation dated 30/6/25, the petitioners submitted that as per the provision of law, they are ready to purchase the disputed land and made an offer to the Municipal Corporation, Korba since the owner of the disputed land is the corporation that they are willing to purchase the 4 disputed land and superstructure for a consideration of Rs 2,52,00, 000/- (Rs Two crores fifty two lakhs) which is much higher than the market value and sale consideration amount of Rs 1,28,80,000/-offered by the private respondents. Subsequently, without considering the offer of the petitioners and further ignoring the fact about the pendency of the proceedings before the Learned Rent Control Tribunal, the respondent no. 3 vide order dated 11/9/25 granted the permission for alienation of the disputed land in favor of the private respondents without any rhyme and reasons and hence, the said impugned order is illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction, without due application of mind and against the provision of law. 3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the value of the disputed land i.e. the amount of Rs. 1,28,80,000/- is according to market valuation. The Municipal Corporation is the owner of the disputed land and the Municipal Corporation has granted lease in favour of the respondent No. 4 which is valid till 2053, therefore the respondent No. 4 has right to alienate of the leasae as per clause 22 of the Lease Deed. Thus, the respondent No. 4 has executed agreement with the respondents No. 6 & 7. However, the respondent-authorities is ready to decide the pending objection/application in an objective manner in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the concerned authorities/ Commissioner, Municipal 5 Corporation to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 30.06.2025 in accordance with law/rules/regulations, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the concerned parties, within an outer limit of 30 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti