sta£a o£wchhattisgar1n I {at 013?: mmoug}; g ‘3‘zzce’ 38c: urban mini$tratian 33.x as ‘ ghawam aaignm {cam} a n gmuumw/fr/J” and mveiopmeata XI-I‘Itzz.’ l - Vx%€;k&§ aWmzmmm” my W513; /‘/i / 3W &¥‘ W WW mmm WWW fzQ‘1W amifa'qm 15/4/2002 Shri P. Diwakar for t e petitioner. 4 Shri Manindra Shriv stava for respondents no.1 and 2. Dr. N.K. Shukla, Ar dl. Advocate General, with Miss Singhai, Dy. Govt. Advoca , for respondent no.3: f Haard. Shri Shrivastava su mits that respondent'No. 1 is no longer in €xistence an respondent No. 1 have bee transferred to respondent No. '2 by notification issued bv t Shri Diwakar, lean produced the notice and demand of justice was sen 17/1/2001. Oopy of the notice be remain on record. ; ' Counsel for the petitil 1 had issued letters, one 2w. 2 th€ assets and liabilities of State Government. 1ed counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the notice for rved on the respondent no.1 on tiled by the counsel so that it may oner sub‘mits that respondent N0. such letter is dated 3-1 1—2001 [1%W XI-HC«22 mmmm § 2, (Annetxure A-3), whereby Uhe petitioner was informed that the 1 x land in question comes within Devendra Nagar Yojana and the respondent No. through amicable settleme required. The petitioner like annexure A—4 etc. hav yet been taken. Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 is now 1m ' the assets and liabilitv of ' ovcr by the Corporation p the State, the Corporatio jeopardizing the rights of Leained counsel for the petitioner had purch Counsel for the resp that the validity and effect and'they are collecting the records. WWW 1%Q°IWR $Wm interested to solve the dispute nt, for which certain formalities ale :w'x l is: submits that requisite?‘ldocuments 3 been submitted but no action has the petitioner submits that since prged in Municipal Corporation and respondent no. 1 have been taken suant to the notification issued bv may create third party interest petitioner. e petitioner further submits that e d the land through the sale-deed. ndent on the other hand submits f the sale—deed is to be considered hie tfe‘h XLHC 22 / $931337 W 311%?! 'WHEQ'?! 'amfazhmqrvffrh%vjm $Walé¥r 16 facm $11 CircummanceS of the case and the material ava lable on record, it is directed that the petitioner shall mak a detailed representation to the State Government throu today along with all the d cuments and copy of this‘petition area still lying, whichushall be 1ch other authority as directed by the State Government as lf receipt of the representation. The " other person including the and the State may also hear such Dner submits that in the meantime )t be created on the open area. hird party interest shall be created un till the representation is decided by the State/competent a ®-WJ¢ Having cansicbmd I: Secretary within 15 daysyfrom :f‘: clearly specifying the 0p decided by the State or s1 early as possible preferably Within two months from the date ( petitioner shall be heard z department. Counsel for the petiti third party interest may n( It is directed that no t on the open area in questi< .uthou‘ty. If any adverse order is Challenge the same afresh. passed, the petitioner may [113%W m $J W a: afar: am m am Fm? _ 4" , m mg ' / With the afomsajd (fiirectisns, this péitétion 1S dwwoged of. \ j Cartifled photocopy as per rules. L Sdl. \W, Fgkh’ruddin ‘JUdge Rég19 L