^^ CTGH CQIJRT OF CHHAmsCARH AT BILASiPUB WritPjetftt»n(C)N<>.6486 of2607 PKTJTIONERS ^. >-<9r?'' RESPQNDIENTS 1. Diikhwa Ram S/o Pardeishi Dhobi, aged about 55 years. 2. Premsin^i Chouhan, S/o Chain Singh Chouhan, aged about 52 years. 3. Amrut Bai, W/o Ghasiya Gond, aged about 52years. 4. Sevaram Netam S/o Paadiu Ram Netain, aged about 46 years. 5. Santri Bai, W/o Bansilal Gond, aged about 60yeara. 6. Dular Sahu S/o E&an Sin^i Sahu, aged about 46 years. 7. Siddya Bai W/o Mangiilu, aged about years. 8. Lallaram S./o Jairam Pardhi, aged about 9) years. 9. Smt. Tliagiya Bai W/o Late Shri Ram Chairan Halwa, ageu about 55 years. 10. Shri Ram Yadav, S/o Sndhir Siagh Yadav, Aged about 55 years. ll.Champa Bai W/o Shyamla!, ^ed about.55 years. 12. Durgesh Sin^i, S/o Shriram, aged about 40 yeans. 13.Kisan, S/o Kamal Kumar, aged aboirt 35 years. 14. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shivlal, a^A about 42 years. All are R/o Kailash Nagar, Ward No. 27, Rajnandga(m (CG). VERSUS 1. Sttate of Chhattisgarh, throu^i the Secretary, Department of Revenue, DKS Building, Mantralaya, SAipw (CG). 2. Collector, Rajnandgaon, Dist. Rajnaiu^aon (CG). 3. Municipal CoiporatitU, Rajnaadgaoii, Dist. Rajnandgaon (CG) through its Cnmnissicner. 4. Nazul QfiRcer, Rajnaffldgaon, Dist. Rajnandg^n(CG). 5. Uday Raj Parakh, S/o Mangal Chand Parakh, aged about 50 years, R/'o G.E.O. Road, Rajnandgaon, Mst Rajnandgaon (CG). 6. Ashdc Parakh, S/o Late Shri Laxniidhand Paraldi, aged about 55 yeais, R7o G.E.O. Road, Rajnandga<»], Distt. Rajnandga<Mi (CG). -^ ^ CWRrr pETmoN UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE coNSTmmoN OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'UeMr.SatishK.Agnihotri,J.) Present Shri B.D. Guru, Advocate fortlw petitioners. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (Passed on tlrfs 30^ ofOcto&er, 2OT7) 1. Learaed counsel appeariag for the petitioners subnritg that on the basis of the judgment and decree dated 27.10.1977 (Annexiire P/2), passed by Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon, in Civil Appeal No. 22-A of 1977 (Purshottam Bhai Gujrati Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh), the respondent No.2 has issued a notice to the petitioners to vacate the preinises, which have been allotted to them, allegedly by an order passed by the Colleetor. 2. Accwding to leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners, the action oflfae respondent No. 2 is based in compliance with the judgment and deca-ee dated 27.10.1977, passed by Additional District Judge, Rajnandgaon. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks pennission oftfais oourt to file a Civil Suit before the appropriate Civi! Court. to Ae meantime, the counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners be protected fi-om dispossession. 3. Be that as it may, withoirt making any observation on merit, the petitioners are at liberty to take recourse to ffle Civi! Suit, ifso advised. 4. The petitioners shall not be dispossessed for a period of 15 days from fhe date ofpassing ofthis order to enable the petitioners to file a Civil Suit, if so advised, and make a proper application for iirterim relief 5. In view ofthe foregoing, this writ petition is disposed of. Sdiu Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge