HAJI MOHAMAD NAEEM SHEIKH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh
Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GOUTAM BHADURI
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Chhattisgarh judgment dated 2020-12-17. HAJI MOHAMAD NAEEM SHEIKH v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 3133 of 2020 1. Haji Mohamad Naeem Sheikh S/o Haji Mohamad Ismail Sheikh Aged About 49 Years Shivam Complex Near Vinod Dharamkanta, Fafadih, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. Anup Kumar Gupta, Aged about 55 years, S/o Balmukund Gupta, Shivam Complex near Vinod Dharamkanta, Fafadih Raipur, District, Raipur (C. G. ) ---- Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban And Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3. The Zonal Commissioner Zone No. 2 Of Municipal Corporation Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4. Dhiraj Jain Aged About 46 Years Add Falat No. FF3 Beside Of Shivam Complex Mansa Chember Fafadih Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For petitioners - Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Advocate. For Respondent/State – Ms. Sunita Jain, G. A. For respondent No.
2- Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Goutam Bhaduri Order 17/12/2020 Heard. 1. Instant petition is filed for the following reliefs:- “1. That, the Hon/ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the records for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court in the matter related to the petitioner. 2. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to inquire the matter and take necessary action against the respondent No. 4 as per Annexure P-3. ” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that respondent No. 4 is raising illegal construction within the crusting of the society wherein the petitioners are the members and though the complaint has been made to the Municipal Corporation, they are not taking cognizance of it, therefore the Municipal Corporation may be directed to take cognizance in respect of the complaint made by the petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent No.
2 would submit that they will conduct a hearing and then pass a suitable order. 4. In view of such submission made, let the petitioners be heard and respondent No. 4 may also be heard, then suitable orders may be passed. 5. With such observation, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Goutam Bhaduri) JUDGE gouri
Source: High Court of Chhattisgarh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.