,\ ci5- H!GH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR WRJTPBTITION (Cl N0. 7319 QP 2011 PBTITION^ RESPONDBNT8 Sharda Soni W/o S.K. Soni, aged about 50 years, R/o Civil Liaes, Vaishnav Colony, Baloda Bazaar, District Raipur (C.G.). State of Chhatdsgarh, fhrough fhe Secrctary, Home Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipiir (C.G.). The CoUector, Rsipur, Distict Raipur (CG). The Sub Divisional Ofiicer (Revenue), Baloda Bazaar, Distdet Raipur (CG). The Additional Collector, Baloda Bazaar, Distnct Raipur (C.G.), Station House Ofiicer, Police Station Baloda Bazaar, Distdct Raipur(CG). Raiiiji Dhruv, Patwad of Pat^ari Halka No. 16, Village Kukuradi, Tatisil Baloda Bazaar, Distdct Raipur (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THB CON8TITUTION OP INDIA. (SB :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present;- Shri Awadh Tripafhi, Advocate for fhe petitioner. Shri Viaod KumarTekam, P.L. for the State. ORDBR VBRSU8 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. V" (Passedon 05/12/2011) By fhis petition under Article 226 of fhe Constitution of India petitioner has chaUenged fhe legaUty aad propriety of fhe order dated 11/10/2011 and notice dated 15/11/2011 issued in coinpUaace of the order dated 11/10/2011 ui revenue case No. A/23 year 10-11 pendiag before fhe Siib Divisional Officer, Baloda Bazaar whereby ia proceediiig under Section 170-B of the C,G. Laad Revenue Code, Revenue Autliority has directed petitioner to produce origmal sale deed and Rin Pustika, faUmg such appropriate crimmal proceedmg may be iaitiated agaiast petitioner belongmg to Heniat Kuxaar. 2. Shri Awadh Tripafhi, Advocate for tiie petitioner and Shri Viaod Kum.ar Tekam, P.L. for fhe State are heard. —^- Leanied coiuisel for the petitioner subniits fhat by filmg reply dated 29/11/2011 vide Annexure P-8 present petitioner has mformed fhe Court fhat aforesaid original sale deed aad Rin Pustika are not ia her possession. After fiUng reply on behalf of fhe present petiUoner Sub Divisional Officer, Balcxia Bazaar has not taken any action or has not proceeded agamst fhe petitioner. Sub Divisional Officer was coinpetenf to direct fhe person for production of docunient which would have been ia her possession but after filing such reply and iaforming it that petitioner is not possession of such docuxaent fhere is no propriety for taking aiiy action or compeUiiig her for production of docunient which is not iii her possession, witli fhese obser^ations, petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs, I.A. No. 1 also stands disposed of T.P. Sharma Judge ^