Judgment · High Court · 2002

Shri Atul Anand A'A'asttty; with Shri Anand Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Mohd. Nasir. counseI. for the respondent; Sv this writ petition filed i-mder Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petition! :r prays for quashing of the order dated 04.8.1997 (Annexi|u-e P-17) whereby respondent no.2 had du-ected for revocjation of pennission t.o petitioner regarding constructi^n of the building roads, drains 1 etc., on the land aUotted to fhe|petitioner. Petitioner is a registered <);o-operative society which has been resi uncter the provp.sions of section 9 of M.P. Co- operative Societies Act 1960.1 Counsel for the petitioner subraits that the petitioner's ^ociety was accordecl sanction and permission for constructi^n of buildtngs, roads, dralns etc., on tlie la-ad allotted to thdm aiid the Petitioner's societv [4^tfeq XI-HC-22 '^ll^lclij, ^Sf tTifrFTTC, [stclKHy '^^a ^^. ^i! .f?;iN;sn^i si7qWHi??I 'hi^yl'il-] TV^ -q TST3t TM q; 3]1^t( s-n^T has spent huge amount nt ot' the 1s However, respondent no.2, th. Comiaissioner of Municipal )oration, Rainandgaon h|as revoked the perraission ;ranted to the Society. Return has been filed b^ the respondents in whlch it has been stated that the impui :ned order has been passed on account of breach of conditidns T resulted in accumiilation of ratb water and drain water m tlie bv the petitioner which vicinift'" creattng health hazajrd to fhe public and the petitioner Society had to inak^ arrangeinents for providing baslc facilities like WBM Road, IPacca drains, ciilverts for free flow of draln water. Annexitire P-16 is the letter dated

17.7.1995 addressed^ to the p^titioner by respondent no. 1 also shown the reason for sus^ending the developinent work that the petitioner did not niak^ arrangements for way out of the draln water and raln wlater which has resulted in accumulation of dtrtv water in the victnity and due to which pn" XI-HC-2: 'S^ ^qpTRTO, '^rftWTS, (si<?li<1;l< '^*? js(»a,iEa3|i%fft w, 1:?:IFB'3W ai^WHf^I sii^i s^irw :gf^ 'ETFR'f feTFf ^ TS^t <fsr i?3lf:OT3TI^i various kinds of diseases have |been spreading and the way out to the Budasagar is blockeid and the pressui'e froin the public is inounting on the authojrities. . It is also pointed out that thc developDient and suprv|sion fee was not pald. 1 Counsel for the petitionerlon the other hand contends that fhe order dated 04.8.1991 7 Annexure P-17 has been passed without giving opportuni|y of hearing to fhe petitior.er Vi'hich is arbitrary, Ulegal and a^ainst. the principle of natural justice. Counsel for the petition^r subiuits that so far as the legal charges is concerned, th^y shall be paid on demaiid from the respondents. Having considered the facjts and circumstances of the case and inateripl on record andlthat the irapugned order has been passed without giving opj^ortiinity to the petitioner, in the opiaion of this Court tliie unpugned orders dated

17.7.1995 (Annexure P-16) and jdated 4.8.1997 (Aunexure P-VI') 3-HC-22 75? "41<)lc)<(, lOTTiy'ltf, ^diy^ snq'^^ii .1" ' 3TH?T '^'•^^ ^T?c[ sntT iraiw ^afeT ^.(-( ^fiFfeih ^TPTCif'? TSi3t l-fSR3R' ^ 3Tf^FT ?IIq?T 17^ passed by respondent no.2 deserve to be set aside and are accordingly set. aside. ...', ,s^KS^ ^l^jjiW^ However, it is open to the jrespondents /Corporation to irupose ^ such developjmental/supervision charges on the petitioner's society by ralsini demaiid is made, the petitioijier society shall pay such charges in accordance with law. <At:iwu..ufcirt' d(Bu.u< lSVi'^A^Ai-^to ^~^~ inav ,'construct the drairife for frd necessan' the Corooration ^" flow of water in accordance with the lav out, so that no heAlth hazard ^Sl aris^aeeM'hc. &A:&Fe<3'& Wlth the dtrecti j disposed ofaX\^ ^y Wtt»^W 1S (X))?£65. CerttBed PJiotocopv be surf plied to the parties fo-0; Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge *1- ^ 1-~ [^'er^sT ^