Chattisgarh High Court
Smt. Ruhi Agrawal vs Raipur Development Authority on 17 March, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:12630
Digitally
signed by
RUKHSAR
RUKHSAR BANO
BANO Date:
NAFR
2026.03.18
10:53:53
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1134 of 2026
1 - Smt. Ruhi Agrawal W/o Shri Shyam Kishor Agrawal Aged About 45 Years R/o
Sector- 1, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Smt. Kamla Agrawal W/o Shri N.C. Agrawal Aged About 73 Years R/o Golden
Glory, Shri Ram Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioners
versus
1 - Raipur Development Authority, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, 2nd Floor,
Bhakt Matakarma Vyavasaik Parisar, New Rajendra Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Chief Executive Officer Raipur Development Authority, 2nd Floor, Bhakt
Matakarma Vyavasaik Parisar, New Rajendra, Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Revenue Officer (Tehsildar) Raipur Development Authority, Raipur (C.G.)
4 - Sub-Registrar Office At Collectorate, Raipur (C.G.)
5 - Sandeep Agrawal S/o Shri Mukund Agrawal Aged About 57 Years R/o House No.
27/437, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
... Respondents
(Cause title, as taken from CIS system) For Petitioners : Mr. Ankur Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For State / Respondent No.4 : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Adv. General.
(Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 17/03/2026 2
1. Heard.
2. This petition has been preferred by petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:-
"10.1 A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of mandamus do issue calling the relevant records from the court below pertaining to the case of the petitioner for its kind perusal.
10.2 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue direction respondent state authority to not to exchange the plot of the petitioner i.e. E-01 area 251.35 sq. mt. situated at Sector-1, Kaushaliya Mata Vihar (Kamal Vihar), Raipur and returned the amount Rs. 37,725/- with interest.
10.3 A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ do issue direction to the respondent state authority that if petitioner's plot requires to exchange then exchange deed must be executed for plot no. D-73 area 252.96 sq. mt. situated at Sector-1, Kaushaliya Mata Vihar (Kamal Vihar), Raipur, in favour of petitioner, as the petitioner had already paid the amount Rs.37,725/-for difference of area 1.61 sq.mt.
10.4 Cost of the proceedings.
10.5 Any other writs and directions that may be deemed fit and just in the facts & circumstances of case."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners purchased Plot No. E-01, admeasuring 251.35 square meter, Sector-1, situated on part of Khasra No.585 at Village Tikrapara, P.H. No.114/70, R.I. Circle Raipur-1, Tehsil and District Raipur, vide registered sale deed dated 13.08.2015 from respondent No.5. Respondent No.5 had obtained the aforesaid plot in exchange from Raipur Development Authority, Raipur (for brevity, "RDA, Raipur") under the Definitive 3 Agreement Scheme. Subsequently, the said land was recorded in the name of the petitioners in all government records and was also declared freehold in their favour. However, all of sudden, respondent No.3 issued Memo dated 04.07.2025 (Annexure -P/6) to the petitioners stating therein that number of their land, E-01, has been changed to D- 73, which contains a larger area than Plot No.E-01, Therefore, the petitioners were directed to deposit an amount of Rs.37,725/- as "प्रब्याजी राशि" in the account of RDA, Raipur, which has already been deposited by the petitioners. Despite that, instead of executing the exchange deed in favour of the petitioners, respondent- RDA executed the exchange deed in favour of respondent No.5. He further submits that the petitioners are ready to file a representation before respondent No.2 for redressal for their grievance. Hence, learned counsel prays that, at this stage, the present petition may be disposed of with a direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation filed by the petitioners expeditiously.
4. In reply, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that he has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.
5. Having considered the limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioners, the present petition is disposed of at this stage by granting liberty to the petitioners to file a representation before respondent No.2 for redressal of their grievance within a period of 15 days from today. It is further directed that, in the eventuality of filing such representation by the petitioners, respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, within a further period of 30 days from the date of receipt of representation along with a copy of this order. 4
6. With aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of.
7. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s).
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar