RIT PETITION [Cl NO. £11 $§ OF 20 PETITIONERs / 1. Smt. Dev Kunwar @ Dropati Bai wd/o Late Shri Bihan' Lal Gond, aged about 55 years. /2. y g” f Kushal Singh s/o Late Shri Bihari Lal Gond, aged about 28 years. Heera Lal Singh s/O Late Shn‘ Bihari Lal Gond, aged about 25 years. Santosh s/o Late Shri Bihari Lal Gond, aged about 18 years, All R/o Village Lormi, Tahsil Lormj, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through Collector Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Lormi, District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh) Tahsiidar, Lormi, District Biiaspur (ca). Revenue Inspector, RC. N0. 5, Lormi, Tahsil Lormi, District Bilaspur (C.G.j Nagar Panchayat, Lormi, through its Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Lormi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Devi Prasad Pandey Vs/o Durga Prasad Pandey, aged about 60 years, R/o Thakurdev, Ward no. 6, rLorrni, District Bilaspur (C.Gi). ESPONDENTS /f l. /2. /5. W 09 R @ (‘4) /7. Manoj Kumar Jaiswal, s/o Ram Lal Jaiswal, aged about 46 years, R/o Thakurdev, Ward no. 6, Lormi, District Bilaspur (C.G.). N WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitioners versus Respondént‘ State of Chhattisgarh and others Present: Shri Sourabh Sharma, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Sushii Dubey, Government Advocate for the State/respondents No.1 to 4. Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of india ORAL OR ER (Passed on 8 January. 2010) Heard Iearned counsel for the petitioners on admission. 2. The only prayer in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia is that the respondents/revenue authorities be directed to decide the representations dated 22-9—2009 and 23-9-2009 (Annexure P—9) tiled by the petitioners in accordance with law and further to issue-appropriate writ directing the respondents/revenue authorities to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law in compliance of the order dated 17-10-2001 (Annexure P-6). The order dated 17-10-2001 was passed by the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue), Lormi, District Bilaspur in Appeal Case No.1 1A-70199-2000 in which it was mentioned that there is no dispute between the parties about the map and the title and thereafter the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) observed that the Revenue Inspector should demarcate the land and inform the parties about the land possessed by them. it also records that both the counsel agreed that the area mentioned in the map prepared is not disputed. This Court faiis to appreciate that when there is no dispute between the parties about the area held by them and the map, why is the matter not settled between them. It appears that the dispute is about the ownership or possession which can only be settled by a jurisdictional Civil Court. The prayer regarding issuance of direction to the respo’ndentslrevenue authorities for deciding the representations and for compliance of the order dated 17— 10-2001 cannot be allowed in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Further, the prayer for seeking compliance of the order dated 17-10-2001 is highly belated and there is no explanation for the delay. 3. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed at the admission stage. - The petitioners, if so advised, would be at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings before the competent/jurisdictional Civil or Revenue Court. Sd/n r ‘ Prashant Kumar Mishra: Judge e r 41;; ,~ -.\ -,,, x[ . “ \