Fauzia Qureshi vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2148 Chatt

                                       -1-




                                                                            NAFR
             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            WP(C) No. 1651 of 2022
      Fauzia Qureshi D/o Mahmood Hasan Kha Aged About 48 Years R/o
      Opposite Farishta Complex, Beside Shiv Mandir, Ward No. 28, Pachari
      Para, Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                    ---- Petitioner
                                    Versus
   1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Home Affairs, Mantralay,
      Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   2. Station House Officer, Mahila Thana, Durg, Chhattisgarh, District : Durg,
      Chhattisgarh
   3. Mohammad Ali Farooki Kajiye Shahar Mohatmim, Madarsa Islahul
      Muslemin And Darul Yatama, Baijnath Para, Raipur, Chhattisgarh,
      District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
   4. Raees Ahmad Qureshi S/o Marhoom Md.Idris R/o Beside Krishna
      Towers, K.K. Road, Moudhapara, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur,
      Chhattisgarh
                                                                ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate. For the respondent/ State : Shri Rahul Jha, G.A.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant

Order on Board

05.04.2022

Heard on petition.

1. The present petition has been brought challenging the notice dated

10.12.2021 issued to the petitioner by respondent No.3 and also for

issuance of a direction to respondent No.1 to take appropriate steps to

keep a check on the functioning of the unconstitutional institution like

respondent No.3.

2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is the wife

of respondent No.4 and they have a matrimonial dispute. Respondent

No.4 has approached respondent No.3 which is an unconstitutional

institution and respondent No.3 has made publication of a notice in the

newspaper dated 10.3.2022, directing the petitioner to appear before it

and mentioning the consequence of ex-parte decision on the matter of

respondent No.4 in case of nonappearance of the petitioner. It is further

submitted that the impugned notice has no legal sanction and it is

without any lawful authority, therefore, the order be passed to restrain

respondent No.3.

Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Supreme Court in

the case of Vishwa Lochan Madan vs. Union of India and Ors.,

reported in (2014) 7 SCC 707.

3. Learned State counsel representing for respondents No.1 & 2 opposes

the submissions and submits that this petition is not maintainable as the

petitioner has sought relief against the private institution.

4. After considering on the submissions, the petition is disposed of. The

petitioner is granted liberty to make representation before the Collector

of the District within a period of 7 days and on filing of such

representation, the Collector of the said District shall consider on such

representation, give opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and

respondents No.3 & 4 and take decision on the same in accordance

with law.

5. With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed off.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nimmi