1 CGHC010279002026 2026:CGHC:31409 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3817 of 2026 Maheshwari Devi W/o Hariram Aged About 72 Years R/o Vinoba Nagar, Boirdadar, Raigarh District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Ministry Of Good Governance And Convergence Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh 4 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 5 - SDO Municipal Corporation Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 6 - Station House Officer Police Station Chakradhar Nagar, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 7 - Patwari Patwari Halka 40, Municipal Corporation Raigarh, District Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Ms. Aayushi Kulkarni, Advocate For State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Deputy Advocate General For Respondents No. 4 and 5 : Mr. Anuroop Panda, Advocate YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.07.24 18:02:47 +0530 2 Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 23.07.2026 1. By filing the present writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the alleged illegal action of the respondent authorities in seizing and removing the petitioner's construction materials without any authority of law and seeks appropriate directions for redressal of her grievance. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s) :- “A. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, including a writ in the nature of Mandamus, directing the respondents to forthwith return/release the entire seized construction material to the petitioner or, in the alternative, to pay the monetary value thereof along with appropriate compensation. B. Issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to refrain from interfering in the petitioner's lawful possession and peaceful enjoyment of her property and from taking any coercive action except in accordance with due process of law. C. Declare that the impugned action of the respondents as illegal, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 300-A of the Constitution of India, as well as the principles of natural justice. 3 D. Direct the respondents to consider and decide the petitioner's representation dated 03.02.2025 in a time-bound manner and to pass a reasoned and speaking order thereon. E. Any other relief(s) in favor of Petitioner as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the officials of the respondent authorities illegally seized the petitioner's construction materials, namely bricks, sand and soil, from the petitioner's property without issuing any notice or passing any order under any statutory provision. It is submitted that despite repeated requests, the seized materials have neither been returned nor has any order justifying such action been communicated to the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the Collector, Raigarh seeking return of the seized construction materials. The Collector, in turn, forwarded the petitioner's representation to the Municipal Corporation, Raigarh for appropriate action. However, till date, no decision has been taken on the petitioner's grievance. It is, therefore, prayed that an appropriate direction be issued to the competent authority either to restore the seized construction materials to the petitioner or to pass a reasoned order on her representation in accordance with law. 4 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respndents No. 4 and 5/Municipal Corporation, Raigarh submits that the Municipal Corporation has received the communication forwarded by the Collector. It is, however, submitted that according to the Municipal Corporation, the construction materials were not seized by its officials and, if at all any seizure has been effected, the same appears to have been carried out by the Revenue Authorities. It is submitted that the Municipal Corporation shall extend all necessary cooperation in the matter and shall act in accordance with law. 4. Learned State counsel submits that since the petitioner has already submitted an appropriate representation before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. It is further submitted that the concerned authorities shall also conduct the necessary enquiry to ascertain the correctness of the allegations made by the petitioner, identify the authority, if any, which seized the construction materials, and thereafter take an appropriate decision in accordance with law. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the limited nature of the prayer made in the present petition, this Court is not inclined to enter into the disputed questions of fact, particularly with regard to the authority responsible for the alleged seizure of the petitioner's construction materials. 6. Accordingly, the competent authority, on receipt of the representation of the petitioner, if not already decided, is directed 5 to consider and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, after conducting such enquiry as may be necessary and after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties. The aforesaid exercise shall be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the rival claims, and all questions of fact and law are left open to be considered by the competent authority independently and uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. 8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh