COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (C) No. 3366 of2007 Petitioners 1 4. Smt, Kamna Jain wife of Shri Deepak Jain, aged about 32 years, resident of Bastar Road, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (CG) Maya Devi Panjwani, wife of Moti Ram Panjwani, aged about 55 years, resident of Isaipara, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) Smt. Bharati Khandelwal, wife of Shri Ramesh Khandelwal, aged about 45 yeare, resident of Santlahri Nagar, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamteri (C.g.) Dr. Ditip Rathore, son of Shri Babulal Rathore, aged about 45 years, resident of - SanUahri Nagar, Dhamatari, Dist. Dhamtari (C.G.) Chandresh Rathore, son of Shri Babulal Rathore, aged about 40 years, resident of-Santlahri Nagar, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (CG) Shivnath Gupta, son of Late Jagmohan Prasad Gupta, aged about 50 years, resident of Tikrapara, Kanker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) Binda Devi Gupia, wife of Shri Shivnath Gupta, aged about 48 years, resident of Tikarapara, Kanker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) Versus Respondents 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Departmsnt Town and Country Planning (Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh) Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Colieetor, Dhamatari(C.G.) Land Acquisition Officer, Dhamtari, Distt. Dhamtari (CG) Nagar Palite Parishad, through its President, Dhamtari (C.G.) Director, Town and Counfry Planning, Raipur (C.G.) Managing Director, District Industries and Business Centre, Dhamtari (C.G.) Tahsildar, Tah and Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) Patwari, Patwari Halte No. 18 (Village Shyamtaria), Distt. Dhamtari (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 QF THECONSTITUTIQN OF V '• SB: Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Shri T.K. Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Yashwant Singh Thakur, Govt. Advocate for the respondents No. 1 and 2/State. ORDER (Passed on this 20 day ofJune,2007) Learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 and 2 submits that this peUtion is pre-mature, as no steps after receipt of the objection by the land owners have been taken. The concemed respondents are under an obligation to consider the objection raised by the land owners. The same is under process at this juncture and this petition be dismissed as not maintainable. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submit that in view of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 and 2, nothing survives in this mater. The writpetition is accordingly disposed of. B/- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ^s^^^^ £:;.L-^''—-—----