@?R^ ^CT^"^^^^^"."'-;"'.' ":i^^>; <?y ^s !SSS 5= cf- (s-/^ C-i^^^_z IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 0'y WRIT PETITION (S) N0: &-L /3»06 PETITIONER .* >••• 'SK;/"?'"'' ^'%"1../"' ^•c&w""" ...-•^M^^" ^' ^- ?.--\^ >°'.. ^Manharan Singh Aged about 70 years, S/o Shri Jaipal Singh R/0. VilJage Thankhainariya Teh. Saja, District Durg (C.G.). ^<<?? RESPONDENTS VERS^ \.^ State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary (Revenue), Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). 2.^ CoUector, Durg(C.G.). 3. Nagar Panchayat, / Village Thankhamariya through ChiefExecutive OfEcer Nagar Panchayat, Village Thankhamariya, Teh. Saja, District Durg (C.G.j. wmr pdmoN UND^ ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA The petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under :- ^ VA.U HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Sincsle Bench: Hon'bte Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra PETfTIQNER RESPONDENTS Writ Petition (Cl No. 7543 / 2006 Mantiaran Singh Versys State of Chhattisgarh and ^hers. Shrt Chandresti Shrivastava, counse! for the petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedl, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the Statafrespondente No. Shri B.K. Chakrabarti and Shri Akhilesh Kumar, counsel for the respondent No. 3. WRrr pETmoN UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORM.ORDER (13.09.2010) (2) The petitioner moved an applteation before the Sub Divisional Offtoer (Revenue) Saja, District - Ourg for restraining the respondent No. 3 from raising constmction on the iand belonging to him. After calting for the spot inspection rqsort the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) dismissed the applfeation vide its orderdated 12-02-2001, however the Tahsildar was directed to hold an enquiry. From the orcter passed by the Boaret of Revenue it would reflect that the revision preferred by the petitioner before the Addittonat Coll^tor, Bemetara was dismissed on 04-2001. The Board of Revenue has ateo dismissed the revision by the impugned order Annexure P/1. Counset for the petitioner vehemently argued that the N^)ar Panchayat is raising construction on the tand belonging to the petittoner and therefore the Board of Revenue should have allowed the .^yS^Bt.^ revision. He wouM submit that the petitioner has nrt teen heard by the Additionat Cotlector, Durg and the appea! was dismissed vnthout noticetohim. (4) Counsel for the respondents, while cyposing the argument raised by the petitioner, has submitted that the impugned order does not call for any interference because disputed questions of fact and tttte are involved. They would submit that if the spot inspection report has been chaltenged by the petitloner then this Court woutd be required to record a finding of fact under Articte 227 of the Constitution of India which Is not permissibte. (5) The petitioner claims to have acquired the property from one Tara Bai by virtue of WILL dated 15-1-1967. There is no supportin^ document in the record of this writ petition in proof of fact that the WILL has ever been tested in a Court of taw, The subject land is a piece of a Abadi tanct of the viliage. Under the provisions of Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code Abadi tana beiongs to the State Govemment. The report of the Revenue Inspector mentions that though the petitioner has pointed-out an area in his possession yet it cannot be determined as to whether the proposed constructton by respondent No. 3 te on the same tand. (6) Thus, from the above it is apparent that serious disputed questions of fgict a(ri title are invotved in the petition. In a petition uncter Articte 227 of the Constitution of India the writ Court is not entltled to enquire about the disputed question of fact and. titte and record a finding thereon. There is no substance in this writ petition, rwhich faite and is hereby dismissed. u.^ /.^ lv. y' ^ i ...SSS'^ 's i ':'%y"~^ j ufc -5- (7) The petitioner if he so ctesires can fite a property cwistituted Civll Suit to agitate the matter and seek appropriate retief. The interim order of status-quo granted in favour of the petitioner is continued for a period of three months from today to enabte him to file a suit. (8) The instant petitlon is dismlssed with above observation. Sd//- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge 'f- ?