HIGH COURT OF CIEIATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P4227) No. 1896,12008 PETITIONER Gram Panchayat, Kheda, through its Sarpanch, Block Navagarh, District Durg (CG) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. Board of Revenue, through its ‘ Registrar, Circuit Bench, at Raipilr \ '2. The Additional Collector, Bemetara, Dietrict Durg (CG) 3. The Sub Tahsildar, Nandghat, District Durg (CG) (APPELLANT) 4. Shri Shivnandan Lodhi, S/o Shri Vichit Ram Lodhi, R/o village Kheda, P.H. No. 20, Tahsil, Navagarh, District Durg (CG) ORAL ORDER 31—3-2098 Dhirendra Mishra, J. Shri Rishi Rahui Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State. '2. The petitioner, being aggrieved by the order dated 19—‘2— 2008 passed by the Board of Revenue of Annexure P-l, has preferred this petition for quashing the above order whereby the Board of Revenue has directed the parties to maintain status quo with respect to possession of the disputed PrOWFtY~ 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent no.4 is an encroacher. The Tahsildar after reg’stering the case of encroachment, directed to remove the encroachment within a period of 7 days. The revision preferred by the respondent No. 4 was also dismissed by the Additional Collector and the order of Tahsildar was i 1h / \ ’ / / maintained: however the Board of Revenue vide impugned order has passed the order of status quo. 4. Considering the fact that the matter is pending before the Board of Revenue in which the petitioner has also been arrayed as a party respondent, the instant petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make his submission before the Board of Revenue who in turn shall decide the Revenue Revision Case No. R.N.05fR/A- 68/892/2007 expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. 5. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Sd/- - Dhirendra Mishra Judge W/ ‘