^ HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0. No. 2642 of 2009 PETITONER RESPONDENTS Smt. Beena Devi, Wife of Jagdish Agrawal, aged about 45 years, Resident of Tahsit Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G) Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G) 2. Collector, Mahasamund, Mahasamund (C.G). District 3. Tahsildar, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G). 4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G) 5. Nagar Panchayat, Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G) through its Chief Municipal Officer. 6. Patwari, Patwari Halka No.9, Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Shri Vivek Ranjay Tiwari, Counsel for the petitioner. Shri U.N.S. Deo, Government Advocate for the State/ respondents no.1 to 4 and 6 on advance copy. ORAL ORDER {20.05.2009) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard on admission. Petitioner Smt. Beena Devi has filed this writ petition for quashment of the notice dated 04.05.2009 (Annexure P-1) and removal order dated 15.5.2009 (Annexure P-2) issued by Tahsildar, Saraipali, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G). 9^ Writ Petition rO.No.2642/2009 '^ A perusal of the writ petition as also the documents annexed to the petition would show that on conclusion of proceeding u/s 248 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959 it was determined that the petitioner was an encroacher on the government land and thereafter an order of removal has been passed and fine of Rs.1000/- was imposed against the petitioner. Mr. Deo, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents no.1 to 4 & 6 takes an objection that admittedly there is an alternative remedy against the order passed by the Tahsildar and the petitioner without availing such remedy has filed this writ petition. In view of the aforesaid objection taken by the Government Advocate, Mr. Tiwari seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail appropriate remedy under the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. However, he submits that since a direction for forcible dispossession has been given, therefore, some protection may be granted to the petitioner so that the structure raised on the disputed land may not be demolished in the meanwhile. On due consideration of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the prayer regarding withdrawal of the writ petition is allowed. This writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with a liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedies available under the C.G. Land Revenue Code, 1959. However, looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in the meanwhile, the status quo as it obtains today at 1 p.m. shall be maintained by the parties for a period of 30 days from today. Accordingly, I.A.No.1 for grant of interim relief, I.A.No.2 for urgent hearing and I.A.No.3 for hearing during summer vacation all stand disposed of. —— - C.c. as per rules. §^/_ Sunil Kumar Sinha ' Judge IRaol