[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Madhya Pradesh High Court
Naresh Talreja vs Municipal Corporation on 27 February, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5798
1 WP-7755-2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE JAI KUMAR PILLAI
ON THE 27th OF FEBRUARY, 2026
WRIT PETITION No. 7755 of 2026
NARESH TALREJA AND OTHERS
Versus
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Dr.Hemnarayan Giri - Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Shashank Shrivastava -Advocate for the respondents.
ORDER
The petitioners have challenged Annexure P/1, a notice dated
24.02.2026 issued by the respondents/Corporation. The petitioners contend
that the said notice was affixed to a neighboring shop at midnight on
24.02.2026, marking their first knowledge of the requirement to vacate their
shop due to the building's dilapidated condition. It is further argued that this
exercise was conducted under the pretext of a direction issued by this Court
in W.P. No. 34136/2025 dated 10.09.2025, a petition filed by one Anil and
others.
2. Counsel for the respondents apprised the Court that Anil and others
are the owners of the entire building, while the petitioners own one shop
therein. Since the entire building is allegedly in a dilapidated state, the
impugned notice was issued. During arguments, the respondents has placed
on record a report from an engineer/agency supplied by the building owner
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5798
2 WP-7755-2026
certifying the building's unsafe condition and recommending demolition.
Upon perusal, it appears the respondent Corporation acted solely upon a
private report produced by the building owners rather than conducting its
own assessment.
3. This Court finds it surprising that despite the previous order being
passed on 10.09.2025, the Corporation waited until 24.02.2026 to issue a
notice granting only two days time to vacate. Furthermore, since the
Corporation maintains its own panel of approved engineers and surveyors, it
was obligatory for them to conduct an independent inquiry to verify the
structure's integrity/condition and the authenticity of the owner's private
report. In the absence of an independent assessment by an empaneled
surveyor/Engineer, the Corporation cannot act arbitrarily at the instance of a
certificate submitted by a private agency without providing occupiers
sufficient breathing time to seek legal remedies.
4. Consequently, considering the actions of the respondents to be
arbitrary, the impugned notice is hereby quashed. This petition is disposed of
with the following directions:
(i) The respondent Corporation shall conduct an
independent survey of the building by an empaneled engineer or
surveyor of the Corporation and a copy of this report shall also be
supplied to the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners are permitted to obtain an independent
expert opinion to controvert the Corporation's findings, if
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2026:MPHC-IND:5798
3 WP-7755-2026
necessary. They are also free to submit title documents and formal
objections to the Building Officer following the survey.
(iii) The Building Officer, after considering these
objections, shall pass a final order. If the building is found to be
dilapidated, the petitioners shall be granted a breathing period of
15 days from the date of the final order to approach a competent
forum before vacating the premises.
(iv) The petitioners shall appear before the authority on
10.03.2026 to produce preliminary objections and title documents
to substantiate their ownership.
(v) No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners
until this entire exercise is completed.
(vi) While the respondents contend the building may
collapse at any time, the petitioners have agreed to tender an
undertaking regarding his personal risk in such eventualities
before the authority on 10.03.2026.
5. With the aforesaid observations, the petition stands disposed of.
(JAI KUMAR PILLAI)
JUDGE
hk/
