1 2026:CGHC:7577 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 592 of 2026  Kishori Lal Agrawal S/o Late Shri Matadin Agrawal Aged About 82 Years R/o Mission Road, P.S. City Kotwali, Korba, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Nagar Palika Nigam Through- Commissioner, Nagar Palik Nigam, Korba (C.G.) 3. Commissioner Nagar Palik Nigam, Korba (C.G.) 4. Estate Officer Nagar Palik Nigam, Korba (C.G.) 5. Manish Agrawal S/o Shri Kishori Lal Agrawal Aged About 46 Years R/o House No. 433, Mission Road, Ward No. 1, Korba, Tah. And Distt. Korba (C.G.) 6. Vikash Agrawal S/o Shri Kishori Lal Agrawal Aged About 37 Years R/o House No. 433, Mission Road, Ward No. 1, Korba, Tah. And Distt. Korba (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner Mr. Ravindra Sharma, Adv. For State Mr. Abhishek Gupta, P.L. For Respondents No. 2 to 4 Mr. Anmol Sharma, Adv. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.02.11 17:27:28 +0530 2 11.2.2026 1) By way of this petition, petitioner has sought following relief(s):- 10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of MANDAMUS directing the respondent No.2 & 3 to take final decision upon the application of the petitioner for transfer of lease deed by the petitioner in favour of respondent No. 5 & 6 expeditiously within the stipulated time framed by this Hon'ble court. 10.2 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue any writ or direction or order as deem fit in the interest of justice. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that lease of Plot No. 33, Indira Commercial & Residential Centre, Korba ad-measuring 2,880 sq. ft. was granted to petitioner in year 1982 and it was renewed on 7.6.2012 for further period of 30 years. He further submits that petitioner moved an application (Annexure P/1) according to Clause 20(a) of the agreement for transfer of lease in favor of his son on 21.7.2025 before respondent No. 2 and 3 but till date said application has not been decided. He prays for a direction to respondent No. 2 and 3 to decide the pending application at the earliest. 3) On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and 3 submits that there is dispute between family members and children of first wife of petitioner have raised objection, therefore respondent No. 2 and 3 has not taken any decision yet. He further submits that disputed questions of facts are involved in this case, therefore petition deserves to be dismissed. 3 4) Heard. 5) Admittedly, lease was granted in favor of petitioner in year 1982 and later on same was renewed on 7.6.2012. Petitioner moved an application for transfer of lease in favor of his son on 21.7.2025 before respondent No. 2 and 3 but till date same has not been decided. As the application was moved according to Clause 20(a) of lease agreement, respondent No. 2 and 3 are under obligation to decide it on its own merits. 6) Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of directing respondent No. 2 and 3 to decide the pending application dated 21.7.2025 moved by the petitioner expeditiously strictly in accordance with law, preferably within a period of 120 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7) It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a