81NGLE BENGH -.?-^i? L^: f HON'BLE HIGH GOURt OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.No. 59!l^ Of2005. PETITIONER A^.^ ^ -f^" '^ <%^p^ ^^y 'y RESPONDENTS /^- Mohd. Israil,^on ofAbdul Sainad, aged ^ about70yeais.residentofQr.No. 12-B, Street 22, Sector-1, Bhilai,DistrictDurg '- (Chhattisgarh). V ER SUS ' :-1. State ofClihatdsgaTh, Ttirough Secretaiy Revenue Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S Bbawaa, Raipur (CUiattisgayh), ^2. Collector, Durg, Collectorate Offiee, Durg, District Durg (eiihattisgarh), ^3. Nazul Jach Adhikari, Durg, €ollectorate Of6ce, Dmg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh), PETmON UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF CONS'IiITRTIQK OJR -BSDIA ^ : - jirII ^•c.q'OWlc'X.I/UTflwK?, Rrtl'tiy *11*1ril^ri^" ••v/Jffs:Ki> S^'l-y?^ 200 an^STtRq? (ylgtr.s) aii^i^rR-ii* ?PIT3II^?TiPWR 31-8-2005 Shri H. B. Agrawal, Sr. 4 Shri Yofihwant 5in9h respondents: Heard both ithe counsel.l The pe'h'tioner haa pref^ that Orjginally the petitionet measuring 2022 sq. mt. situ4 limits of town of t>ur9. The s4 petitioner as an dgent pf Az| doing his business of cycle; dispossessed by Aziz9ui, fta( petitioner applied for separoT^ 9rante<l vide Annexure-P/21 petitioner was riot in a Thsrsfore, vide Annexure-P/21 for exemption from the the State 6overnment for exek being decided. The petition^ Annexure-P/27 and thereafNi 't+ie case of l+ie petitioner for is not bj»in9<tcci<ied by responc)< (dvocate for the petitioner. ^ T^iakur, 0ovt. AdvpGate for the State/ premi|im sponcjent <BI«fn<fll*tl*lCTY^ftsul9xRl'C<;l'( !t(3iK)*ian^f f^rrcd this writ petition with a grieyanec was in possession of the land - ad (ted at Titurdeeh | within The municipal A»^- .i. . ' . '.., i: [id land was iDStin -the possession of The |zgul, Rafiqgul and ftaisgul, dnd he was parts. However, he was forcefully pqgul and ftaisgu! Thereafter, the lcmd&n lease basis and ThaT lease was at the cost of Rs.80,000/-. The p^sition to deposit the said arnount. he 'was asked to move •the ©overnment andland rent. The petitioner moved ^nptiorf of ihe sdme, but The same is not \r approached the Chief Minister' vide )r, again representation was sent, but exempting from premium and hnd rent No.l. *ii*i<*r^'n^""" 'ii-":) ir010l<»y;wn1wicB,:R?)i'(iy< ,.^^D»..^^..^§^2oo sii^CTmR-il*; aaiiaii^si**)!* r 6arve sn^yfTWp (^cii^q.g) colunsel circumsttmlces Counael for "the respondent No.l be direeted| petitioner in accordance wit^i respondentis has no objection. Having heard learned td the Ixasts and directed to decide -riie repr^ss exemption frompaying premi4m months from todny. If copy o| avajlabte with respondent No.l|. to make a detaited representa) of 20 days and in tum, respon(iei months from the date of reaarding exemption from considering qll the points mqnner, in accordmice with law.l With •the direction Partiesare entitled for pe|titioner pr^sentatioi raited aforefeaid <bl<<(d41'1 Hl<lril ^t'ts'-ilxRn^i't ^si^isn^T submitted thct iherefore, to decide the representation of tha law to which learned counsel for spon(ient rec^ipT for the part'ies and having regard of the case, respondent No.l 'is sentation of the petjtioner regarding and lond rent withiri a period of 3 the opplication of -the petitioner is not in that ca^, the petitioner isaltowed ion to respondent No.l within a period No.l shall decide the same within 3 of rept'esentaTion of The petitioner premium and lcBid rent, after by the petitioner in an objective ppying dpsd, +he petition stands disposed of. c^rtified copy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo