1 2026:CGHC:25822 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3059 of 2026 1 - Naresh Mittal S/o- Late Shri Ramniwas Mittal, Aged About 58 Years Presently Residing At Dhimrapur Chowk Opposite Shyam Petrol Pump, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, (C.G.). 2 - Subhash Mittal S/o- Late Shri Ramnarayan Mittal Aged About 64 Years R/o- Gurudwara Road, Raigarh, Tehsil And District- Raigarh, C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration And Development , Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector, District- Raigarh, C.G. 496001. 4 - Sub-Divisional Magistrate, District- Raigarh, C.G. 496001. 5 - Municipal Corporation Raigarh Through Commissioner, Raigarh Municipal Corporation, Raigarh, District- Raigarh, C.G. 496001. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Suresh Mittal @Suresh S/o- Late Shri Ramniwas Mittal, Aged About 64 Years R/o- In Front Of Jagdish Medical Store, Gurudwara Road, Tehsil And District- Raigarh, C.G. 496001. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aman Tamboli, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. S. S. Choubey, G.A. For Respondent No. 5 : Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 24/06/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 Call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the Petitioner from the possession of respondents for its kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No.3, 4 and 5 to take immediate steps to remove the illegal, unauthorised and dangerously structured construction situated over the land bearing Sheet No.43, plot no.227/1 admeasuring 1115 sq. feet/104 meter within the limits of Municipal Corporation Raigarh, in the interest of justice. 10.3 This Hon'ble Court be further pleased to pass such other order(s) or direction(s), as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the Petitioners against the 3 respondents under the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in the interest of justice.” 2. Brief facts of the case, is that, the present writ petition has been filed challenging the arbitrary, illegal and deliberate inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in failing to discharge their statutory and public duties, thereby extending illegal protection and shelter to Respondent No. 6, which has resulted in serious prejudice, hardship and imminent danger to the petitioners. The petitioner No. 1 and Respondent No. 6 are co-sharers and joint owners of an old residential-cum-commercial building situated over land bearing Sheet No. 43, Plot No. 227/1, admeasuring 1115 square feet (104 square metres), falling within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Corporation, Raigarh (hereinafter referred to as the "suit property"). The structure standing over the suit property is several decades old, highly dilapidated, structurally unsafe and in a dangerous condition, making it liable to collapse at any moment and thereby posing a grave threat to the lives and safety of the occupants, neighbouring residents and pedestrians. In view of its hazardous condition, demolition of the existing structure and reconstruction thereof has become absolutely necessary in the interest of public safety. The ground floor of the suit property consists of several commercial shops, while Respondent No. 6 resides on the upper floor. Although Petitioner No. 1 has vacated the residential portion of the building to safeguard himself and his family from any untoward incident, he continues to remain in 4 possession of certain shops situated therein and, being a co- owner of the property, would also be exposed to legal consequences in the event of any unfortunate mishap. Petitioner No. 2 is residing in a house situated immediately adjacent to the suit property and is equally exposed to the imminent danger posed by the unstable structure. Apprehending serious loss of life and property, Petitioner No. 2 had earlier initiated proceedings under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by filing an application before Respondent No. 4, which was registered as Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 76/2015, seeking removal of the dangerous structure. Upon due consideration of the material placed on record and after conducting appropriate proceedings, the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, by order dated 05.10.2017, directed Respondent No. 5 to remove the dangerous construction forthwith. Significantly, the said order has attained finality, as Respondent No. 6 has never challenged the same before any competent appellate or revisional forum. It is further submitted that the construction raised over the suit property is not only dangerous but is also unauthorized and has been made in violation of the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, for which several notices have been issued by the office of Respondent No. 5 directing Respondent No. 6 to remove the illegal construction. Despite repeated complaints submitted by Petitioner No. 2 during the years 2014, 2015 and 2017 specifically bringing to the notice of the respondent 5 authorities that Respondent No. 6 had raised unauthorized construction and that the structure had become highly unsafe and likely to collapse, no effective action has been taken. Although statutory notices have repeatedly been issued by the Municipal Corporation, the respondent authorities have failed to implement their own orders and statutory obligations, allegedly on account of the immense political influence and muscle power exercised by Respondent No. 6. Consequently, despite the existence of a final order passed by the learned SDM directing demolition of the dangerous structure, the same has remained unexecuted for several years. Petitioner No. 1 has also submitted numerous representations and complaints before the competent authorities highlighting the continued non-compliance of the SDM's order and requesting immediate intervention to avert any untoward incident; however, all such representations have gone unattended. The continued inaction on the part of the respondent authorities demonstrates a complete failure to discharge their statutory obligations under the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act and other allied laws, thereby permitting Respondent No. 6 to continue with the illegal and dangerous construction with complete impunity. Such arbitrary and deliberate inaction not only jeopardizes the lives and property of the petitioners and the general public but also undermines the rule of law and reflects a situation where Respondent No. 6, by virtue of his political influence, has been able to frustrate the 6 implementation of lawful orders passed by the competent authorities, compelling the petitioners to invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Respondent No. 6 is residing in a house which is in an extremely dilapidated and dangerous condition and is liable to collapse at any point of time, thereby posing a serious threat to the lives and safety of the occupants as well as the neighbouring residents. It is submitted that Petitioner No. 1 is the real brother and co-sharer of Respondent No. 6, whereas Petitioner No. 2 is his cousin as well as an immediate neighbour residing adjacent to the house in question. Learned counsel further submits that, on an application preferred by Petitioner No. 2 under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, after conducting due proceedings, passed an order dated 05.10.2017, categorically recording a finding that the house in question was in a highly dilapidated and unsafe condition and, accordingly, directed Respondent No. 6, who was a party to the said proceedings, to remove the dangerous structure forthwith. It is submitted that the said order has attained finality as the same has never been challenged before any higher forum. However, despite the lapse of several years, Respondent No. 6 has deliberately failed to comply with the said order and has continued to occupy the unsafe structure. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners have also submitted a detailed representation 7 before the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raigarh, bringing the entire facts to the notice of the competent authority and requesting immediate action in accordance with law; however, the said representation has not been considered till date. It is further submitted that with the onset of the rainy season, the possibility of the house collapsing has substantially increased, thereby creating an imminent danger to the lives and properties of the neighbouring residents, particularly Petitioner No. 2, who resides adjacent to the disputed house, as well as Petitioner No. 1, who is also directly affected by the existence of the hazardous structure. 4. Learned counsel appearing for Respondent No. 5 submits that the Municipal Corporation shall take appropriate action on the petitioners' representation in accordance with law. It is submitted that within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, the competent authority shall issue notice to Respondent No. 6, undertake an inspection of the premises in accordance with the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, and after providing due opportunity to all concerned parties, shall pass an appropriate reasoned order strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 30 days thereafter. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that, since the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raigarh, was passed as far back as 05.10.2017, in the event the Municipal 8 Corporation initiates proceedings pursuant to the petitioners' representation, the State authorities shall extend all necessary assistance and cooperation to the Municipal Corporation for effective implementation of the statutory provisions. It is further submitted that if, upon inspection, the house in question is found to be in a dilapidated and dangerous condition, the concerned authorities shall take all consequential steps in accordance with law, including providing necessary police assistance for removal of the hazardous structure, if so required. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length and after perusal of the material available on record and after considering submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the controversy involved, this Court is of the considered view that no further adjudication is required at this stage. Accordingly, the concerned authorities of the Municipal Corporation, as well as the State authorities, are directed to issue an appropriate notice to Respondent No. 6 within a period of seven days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and thereafter conduct an inspection of the house in question strictly in accordance with the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956, and other applicable laws. In the event the structure is found to be in a dilapidated, dangerous or unsafe condition, the competent authorities shall take all necessary consequential action, including demolition or removal of the hazardous structure, strictly in 9 accordance with law, after following the prescribed procedure and affording due opportunity to the affected parties. The entire exercise shall be completed, as far as possible, within a period of 30 days from the date of issuance of notice. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present writ petition stands disposed of. 8. It is, however, made clear that the petitioners shall be at liberty to approach this Court again, if the respondent authorities fail to comply with the directions issued hereinabove within the stipulated period or if any illegality, arbitrariness or irregularity is found in the implementation or compliance of this order. Such liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to seek appropriate relief in accordance with law. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat