w. 'fi HIGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR D1VISIONBENCH CORAIVI: HON'BLESHR!RAJEEVGUPTA,CJ. HON'BLESHRISUNILKUMARSINHA. RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. Ashok Bindai, S/o Shri Balaram Bindal, Aged about 44 years, R/o Soni Badha, Than Khamaria Saja, Distt. Durg (Chhattisgarh) Nagar Panchayat Than Khamariya, through its Chief Municipal Officer, Than Khamaria, District Durg (CG) Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Than Khamaria, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) President, Nagar Panchayat, Than Khamariya, Shri Anand Singhania, S/o Shri Chiranjiv Singhania, President Nagar Panchayat, Than Khamariya, R/o Main Road, Ward No.10, Than Khamariya, Durg (CG) CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Present: Shri Ashish Shrivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri SourabhSharma, learned counsel forthe rd J i The foilowing order of the Court vvas passed by Learnedcounsel forthe parties are heard; 2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the followi reliefs: 'SiS!££EiS:Sa^ws3^^^SS^^^S:^^^K':issj^^:s' ^5w£?si'*?IT?"?%s'T •AeMpiLU >|JOM 341 psuopueqe seq 'pooy!|9>|!| ||e uj pue (l,/d s-inxsuuv) loej}uoo sqi jepun >|JOM eyt psisidLuoo iou sey J3UO!i!}3d 341 IB41 »U3jeddesi 11 'snLji •-/000'00'S'sy P 3un}34» o( j9UO!i!tad 94} Aq u3>|Byspun >|JOM 94} joj tueujAed 34} asjnqsip oi s}uspuods9j 94} oi uoipsjjp e Bui^sss s! jsuoitiisd 941 •^ •sABpoSl.io pousd B u!4}iM -/ooo'99'Sl'sy 4"oqe 6uin|eA ioej}uoo ai|} ui peuoiiusui >|JOM 341 }no BuiAjjeo joj £OOZ-ZO-6Z uo l./d s-inxsuuv spiA I.'ON luapuodssj Aq loejtuoo e pepjeMB SEM jeuoiiiisd BL|I •£ ,,'esBO siqi p)soo sq) wffi 6uoie pstuejB eq OS|B AELU 'sseo aq) jo ssoueisiunojio pue StOB.[ i0 M91A Ul JSdOjd pUB }IJ SUJ39p IJnOQ 9]q,UO|-| 9it)l yoiyw 'sjsiiaj jo ^aiiej j9i|}o Auy 'S'Z' •p3}3idLU03 sq 01 sLues sqt Buiuitujsd PUE pSnOljB >|JOM Sqi Ul 8J9.1J31U! 0} IOU siuapuodssj 34} Bujioejip sniuepuetu ^o }UM eiBudojdde ue snssi0} p3SB3|d sq A|pui>| Aeiu ynoo 3|q,uoj-| 3141 ^'L •sisisqns PBJ}UOO s.jsuoiiiisd aq} |!!I>|JO/A P!BS 31)} JO^ SJ9pJO >|JOM ySSJj luejQ 0} }ou siuspuodssj 9L)} Bufloejip sniuepueui p IUM 9)eudojdde ue enssi o} psse3|d sq A|pui>| AELU ynoo 3|q,uo|-| SILJI g'z •-/OOO'OO'Z'syjo 3un}3i|t 0} J8uoii!}sd eqi Aq U3>|ey9pun >|JOM 34} jo.) lueaiAed sqi Buisjnqsip JOj sdeis SAiioeys 3>iBtO} S)uapuods9J sqi Suipsjjp sniuepUBLU .(G }UAA eiBudojdde ue snss! 0} paseeid sq A|pui>| ABLU ynoo 3|q,uo|-| s!i|i 's'z •lesmad pu!>|St! jo^ }U3puodsej sqi ^o uoissessod sqi LUOJJ sjeuoiitisd sqi p sseo 341 Buiujeouoo spjoosj 3Ji}U3 34} jo^ ||eo 01 p3SE3|d sq A|pU!>) Aeiu ynoo 3|q,uoH SIL)! \.'j_, 0: •>.1 ~^ \ *->: nimmi 5. Fromthe above mentioned broad featuresof the case,it is apparent that the writ petition inyolves disputed questions of fact which cannot be resolved in writ proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the parties would be required to lead evidence in support of their claims, which is not permissible in writproceedings. 6. Thus, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed with the liberty to the petitioner to avail the other remedies which may be avaitable to him under the relevant provisions of law. 7. Consequently, M.W.P. No. 438/2006 also stands dismissed. ^—_^_^ ___^— Sd/- Chief Jusdce Sd/- Suiul Kumar Sinha Judge ^^A^S^&.s&S^^^^^^^I