4 '"•g E 'S'SKliR'tS {Mj£. ^iSM'SV C 'P- !v-o L IN THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BU.ASPUR rFHHATTTSGARH) W.P.fONo. Z^6 Of2007. PETITIONER <^ . o J-^ll^. ^o^^ .-y^ ^••' >'« ^ A ^ RESPONDENTS ^ •.p.'1'"'1*^ "?; *[ ^€^\^ j %'•• °::-.-<^"/»1 ^;-^^// i.^,'--- ^p. .' n.. - < te;c"P,.-^^ '^•^ ... :- Municipal Corporation, Bhilai Through Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Bhilai, G.E. Road, Bhilai, DistrictDurg (Chhattisgarh). VERSUS :- 1. Sales Officer, Co-operative Societies, Durg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh), 2. Bhilai Nagrik Sahkari Bank Maryadit, Through President, Sector 6, Bhilai, Tahsil and District Durg (Chhattisgarh), 5. Registrar Co-operative Societies, Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh), 4. Smriti Grih Nirman Samiti Maryadit, Through it's President, Junwani, Bhilai, District Durg (CtAatdsgarh), 5. Collettor, Durg, Distnct Durg (Chhattisgarh), "7 ^ fa: State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Awas Evam Paryavaran Vibhag, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipiir (Chhattisgarh), 7. Deputy Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Durg, Distiict Durg (Chhattisgarh). PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF CONSTITUTION OFmDIA w^^^^^s^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^%s%?'%i%;%i¥l^l|K||||iB|j||||gggig|ggig|}|{g^ ;~%iigSl8fil H IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRrrPETmON (Ct NO. 276 OF 2007 Petitioner Respondents Versus Municipal Corporation, Bhitai. Sales Officer, Cooperative Societies, Durg & Others. WRIT PETITtON UNDER ARTICLE 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTtON OF INDIA (SB: Hon'ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri H.B.Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Smt. Meera Jaiswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Amiya Kant Tiwari, Advocate for the respondent No. 1 and 2. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy Government Advocate for the State/respondent No. 3,5, 6 and 7. Shri Y.C.Sharma, Advocate for the respondent No. 4. ORDER (ORAL1 (Passed on 25th day of September, 2010) Learned counset appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of clear and categorical statement made by the respondent No. 1 and 2 in their affidavit dated 10.04.20)7, to the effect that the land in dispute herein i.e. Khasra No. 744, 762, 765 admeasuring 2.85 acres, are not a pari: of the auction proceedings which is under challenge in this petition and as such, nothing survives Tor adjudication. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents do not controvert the above submission. In view ofthe above, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- SatfehK.Ag"bow 3udge y.v^-