-#it? 'fH ifK:; ^^ IN THE HONOURABL.E CHHAmSGARH HIGH JUQICATURE ATBILASPUR Writ Petition No. J-e^5 / 20Qg Petitioner cou Versus Respondents: 0; Kaushal Kumar Sharma S/o Balram Sharma, Aged aboyt: 37 years, R/o Villags: Rajkheta, Tahsil: Wadrafnagar, District Surguja, Chhaffisgarh. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: it's Principal Seeretary: Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Raipur, CG. 02. DistrictCoolector, District: Surguja, Chhattisgarh. 03, Sub Divisional C)fficer{Rev§pfie],Wadrafnagar, Distriet: SurguJa.Chhatfisgarfi. /' 04; Tahsildaar Pratappy(r Districfc Surguja, Chhattisgarh. j. Writ Petition underarticle ^Ffc AUL tcle 226 of fhe Constitution of India, (^s.y'' ^^^z H 'm' H rf Appearance: Shri M.K. Baeg, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer for the respondents. ORAL ORDER (7.10.2010) In the instant writ petition the petitioner has prayed that the respondents be directed to arrange for the security of the land belonging to the petitioner's family and the respondents be also directed to pay damages to the petitioner. (2) In the body of tlre writ petition which runs in one and a half pages nothmg has been mentioned as to who are the persons who are trying to dispossess the petitioner/though it has been mentioned that the villagers at the behest ofthe local politician are trying to encroach his land, yet no particulars or details are mentioned. The vvrit petition is not supported by any other document to suggest that the petitioner has ever approached the administrative authorities at flie district level or made complaints about the illegal act of any authority or any individual. .2 [3) In view of the above, the writ petition lacks in material pleadings and particiilars. It deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to approach the local administrative authorities ifany ofhis legal right is infringed. (4) With the above direction, the writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge r