[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Chattisgarh High Court
Manish Kumar Pandey vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 26 February, 2026
1
2026:CGHC:9957
Digitally
signed by
RUKHSAR
NAFR
RUKHSAR BANO
BANO Date:
2026.02.26
17:12:03
+0530
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 823 of 2026
1 - Manish Kumar Pandey S/o Shiv Kumar Pandey Aged About 52 Years R/o Ews
283, Sector No. 4, Ddu Nagar, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
2 - Prabhu Nath Rajbhar S/o Late Shri Jayshri Prasad Aged About 57 Years R/o Cw-
02, Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
3 - Satya Narayan Son Shri Gauri Shankar Pradhan Aged About 48 Years R/o De-
07, Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
4 - Pramod Saroj S/o Shri Jit Lal Saroj Aged About 47 Years R/o Ew-34, Indraprath
Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
5 - Pramod Shandilya S/o B.D.S. Shandilya Aged About 67 Years R/o Ds-03,
Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
6 - Jagmohan Kumar Chandra S/o Shri R.S. Chandra Aged About 41 Years R/o De-
04, Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
7 - Omprakash Hanwant S/o Mahesh Kumar Hanwant Aged About 28 Years R/o De-
26, Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
8 - Manoj Kumar Bhagat S/o Shri Sarjoo Ram Bhagat Aged About 42 Years R/o Ce-
04, Indraprath Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur
9 - Hira Pendro S/o Late Daoo Ram Pandro Aged About 57 Years R/o Ew 33,
Indraprasth Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
10 - Rajesh Kumar Sharma S/o Laxmi Narayan Sharma Aged About 66 Years R/o
Ce 2, Indraprasth Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
11 - Anshul Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Srun Kumar Gupta Aged About 47 Years R/o De
66, Indraprasth Phase I, Raipur, Tehsil And District Raipur (C.G.)
... Petitioners
versus
2
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Awas Avam
Paryawaran, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Raipur (C.G.)
2 - CEO Raipur Devlopment Authority Bhakt Mata Parisar, New Rajendra Nagar,
Raipur (C.G.)
3 - Additional CEO Raipur Devlopment Authority, Bhakt Mata Parisar, New Rajendra
Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)
4 - Commissioner Municipal Corporation Raipur (C.G.)
5 - Joint Director Nagar Tatha Gram Vinesh, District Office Raipur
6 - Collector Raipur C.G.
... Respondents
(Cause title, as taken from CIS system)
For Petitioners : Mr. Manay Nath Thakur, Advocate.
For State/ Respondents No.1, 5 & 6 : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, P.L.
For Respondent Nos.2 & 3 : Mr. Animesh Tiwari, Advocate
For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate
(Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Order on Board
26/02/2026
1. Heard.
2. The present petition has been preferred by petitioners under Article
226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief(s) :
"A. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of
appropriate nature do issue calling the records from the
respondent authorities concerned pertaining to the case of
the petitioners for its kind perusal.
B. A writ and/or an order in the nature of appropriate writ
do issue directing the respondent authority
representation /to decide the complaint of the petitioners
in the time bond manner in accordance with law in facts
and circumstance of the case.
C. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of
appropriate nature directing the respondent authority to do
its public duty and fulfill its commitments made in the
brochure published by the respondent authority and pay
compensation to the petitioners in facts and circumstance
of the case.
D. A writ and/or an order in the nature of writ of
appropriate nature directing the respondent authority to
conduct enquiry and fasten accountability on the concern
officers who has failed to discharge its lawful duty and
caused loss to state exchequer in facts and circumstance
of the case.
E. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deems fit
in the facts & circumstances of case.
F. Cost of the petition may also be awarded."
3. Learned counsel for the the petitioners submits that in pursuance of the
public brochure titled "Indraprasth Duplex Residential Scheme
Raipura", the petitioners purchased duplex houses from the respondent
Nos.2 & 3. He further submits that respondent Nos.2 & 3 have not
constructed the boundary wall in accordance with the approved layout
plan and that the bricks used in the construction are also contrary to
the specifications mentioned in the brochure. He also submits that the
petitioners have submitted various representations for redressal of their
grievance as well as compensation, but the same have not been
decided yet. Hence, learned counsel prays that the present writ petition
may be admitted for hearing.
4. In reply, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 & 3
submits that, if the petitioners have any grievance, they may approach
the Real Estate Regulatory Authority, Raipur (hereinafter referred to as
"RERA, Raipur"), therefore, the present writ petition is not maintainable.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 4 to 6 also
extended their support to the submission made by learned counsel
counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
6. The grievance raised by the petitioners is that the said duplex
residential houses have not been constructed as per the approved
layout and brochure, as boundary wall has not been constructed and
bricks of inferior quality have been used. For redressal of such
grievance, the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016
has been enacted by the legislature, therefore, the petitioners have an
efficacious alternative remedy to approach RERA, Raipur.
7. In that view of matter, this Court is not inclined to entertain the present
writ petition, hence, the same is dismissed. However, liberty is left with
the petitioners to approach RERA, Raipur for redressal of their
grievance in accordance with law.
8. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No
order as to cost(s).
Sd/-
(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi)
Judge
Rukhsar
