WRIT PE’I‘I’l‘ION UNDER ARTICLE 226/ 227 OF THE CONS’I‘i’l‘U’I‘ION OF INDIA (SB: Hon’ble Shri San‘sh K. Agnihotn’ J.) Sbri D. N. Prajapah, Advocate for ths petmonar. Shri Shashank ’l‘hakur, Panel Lawyer for the mspondents. 0 R D E R (Passed on this 12‘11 Day of Janualy, 2009) 1. The peu'tioner, by this petition 'impugns the Older dated 12.12.2008 (Annexure P] 1), passed by the Sub Divisional Ohicer, Patan, Durg in Appeal Case No. 32-A/68 year 2007—08. By order dated 13.9.2005 passed by the Tahsildar, Gundeniehi in Revenue Case No. 34/A-68/ 04-05 the petiu‘oner was directed to vacate the encroachment from the Govt. land bearing survey No 141 and to pay a nne ol Rs 1000/ 3. Earlier the pennoner nled W P (22.7) No. 2241/2008 before this Court. By oxder dated 8.5.2008 (Annexum W8) the matter was remitted back to the Sub Divisional Uhicer, Burg for considering the application for condonation ofdelay, afresh. 4. After considering the appeal of the petitioner on merit, by the impugned order dated 12.12.2008 the Sub Divisional Officer, \ \ Patan, Durg has confirmed the order dated 13.9.2005 passed by \ - x \\the Tahsildar, Gunderdehi. \ \ \w\°\\$§ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHA’IVI‘IS(3A&fj : BILASP w.P. (C) No. 131 of 2009 Petitioner bhvam Lal Dhankar Aged about 56 vears S/o Shn Dlmpal Dhankar R/o Vxllagv RaJoh , Tah311 Gunderdelu Dlstt Durg (b G) Vsmus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Coilector Dung, District Durg (C.G.) 2. Sub Divisional O$ccr, Patan, District Durg (0G. 3. The Tahsildar Gundcrdehi, Disu'ict Durg (C.G.) MQ Be that as it may, thc petitioner is questioning the title and ownership of the disputed land which cannot be decided by this Court in a petition under writ jurisdiction. However, on the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, liberty is reseived to the petitioner to approach to the jurisdictional civil Court, if so advised, which may be available to him under provisions of law. In view of the above, Without going into the men'ts of the case, this petition is dismissed as not maintainable. Thakur Satish K. Agnihotri Judge v l Sd/- l