1 2026:CGHC:5703 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 422 of 2026 Neha Singh D/o Haldhar Singh Aged About 36 Years R/o Village- Nandaurkala Tehsil Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Urban Administration And Rural Development Department D.K.S. Bhawan Mantralaya Raipur, P.S. Civil Line, Post- Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Palika Sakti P.S. Sakti District- Sakti (C.G.) 3 - President Nagar Palika Parishad Sakti, P.S. Sakti, District - Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 02.02.2026 1. The petitioner has filed this writ petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 To kindly direct the respondents to provide the alternate shop to the petitioner. 10.2 To kindly direct the respondent to return the amount paid by the petitioner in installments total of Rs.2,14,000/- with interest from dated 06.06.2011 to the petitioner. BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.02.03 11:02:58 +0530 2 10.3 To kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioners for allotment of shops by giving them preference at newly constructed commercial complex. 10.4 To direct the respondent to decide the representation of the petitioner within a prescribed period. 10.5 Any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the cost of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was initially allotted shop in Guru Nanak Complex situated at Budhwari Bazar, Sakti. Said complex was consisted of 24 shops, out of which Shop No.7 was allotted to the petitioner in an auction proceeding. Petitioner deposited the entire amount of Rs.2,14,000/-, however, possession was not handed over to her and suddenly the entire complex was demolished by respondent authorities. The petitioner made personal request time and again to provide alternate shop and if it is not possible, then to return back the amount deposited by her, however, till date no decision is taken. The petitioner also submitted written statement/application before respondent No.2 on 15.12.2025 (Annexure P/4), but the same is also not considered till date and therefore, a direction be issued to respondent No.2 to consider and decide application/representation submitted by the petitioner within specified time. 3. Learned State counsel submits that grievance of the petitioner is against respondent No. 2 and 3 and he is not representing those respondents. 4. I have heard counsel for respective parties and perused the documents annexed with the record of writ petition. 5. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for respective parties and also nature of grievance raised in this writ petition that the 3 petitioner has deposited the entire amount towards Shop No.7 situated at Guru Nanak Complex, Budhwari Bazar, Sakti but the shop is not alloted to her and at a later point of time, entire complex was demolished by respondents No. 2 & 3, without entering into the merits of the case, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition, at this stage, directing respondents No. 2 & 3 to take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law. 6. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondents No.2 & 3 to take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order passed by this Court. 7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini