iNOLEBENCH : Hon'bie Sbri 3.R. Nayak, C.J. W.P. t"? ?^£ ; ^r ^uu§ ri»S i i S;'w:f1iS,;i~:iL hnni- tfi h/t^i-it -k^' versus r-^iatstr° 4. Jaspal Singh Taluja, aged years, son or snn l-larA'ans, Cvcle Spar9 Psrt StorsSj Slhsws Chowk, Dhamtari, Disa. Dhamiari (C.G.) The State of Chhattisuarh, Througn the District Collector, Distt. Dhamtarl (C.G.) The Secretary, Department of Pubiic & vvorKs, uau Katyan Singh unawan, Mantra 3V. RsitDur fC.G.) The Sub Divisional Officer, Pubiic Works Deuartment Sub Division "•;;..,-..^,A^.,; r-%:~N. r^h^i^^^--.; /^ ^ \ U'iisii i ii.cit i, L^isu. L^iicii'iiusai i lk».'.\-1.? The Tahsildar, Dhamtari, Distt. tr^'1 Ifctl S :».&*! ihattisgarh) The Nagar Paiik Parishad Dhamtari, throuah - the Chi Dhamtari (C.G.) seuuvs UITICSF : Shri V.R. Tiwari, learned counse! for the petitioner. Shri Yash'want Singh, iearned Govt. Advocate for the Stats. Ei'p^i?ss£sf| f^r^ ^|ln Ai^rll. 9f)0fi^ This wrlt petition is directed against the notlce marked as Annexure P/1 produced at page 1 O of the material papers dated 07-03-2006, issued bv the Sub Divisionai Offlcer, Public 'vvorks DeDartment, Sub D'vision Dhamtari, District Dhamiari, the third respondent herein, atteging that the petjtionef has encroached a space ad-measuring 12 feet x 18 fee'l (216 r^.^^ c^3 y'^~-~ ^^- L-\^'\ l-a<-^l-/^?--i-^u ? !i^^:^ -~?"-^ 4t^*>^\ Qi! l^--.!^^- \ A/.TrI^"L-<ift- F^-'-s ^=-^ ^^±^A-^^UE£= L^?iai ^*^^ ^j^.^^^f^ ^h^ ta43 S'^Ucii^ t's^i: h/yiyiiyh'iy LU i.i iTd i'"UiJ'iitrf 'v'VwiKS? L-/Sp<ai Ufiyi ii, V^riK/il i<3!HiS pSfe of a public road and directlng the petitioner to rsmovs the illsga! constt'uctlon msds bv hlm in ihs said Dlot of Ifincl whils s'dmlnistsrinc] s. thrsat that if he fails to do so, the authorities would aDproDriate steos to remove/demolis'n the ilieflai construction. The petltioner, it is true, has -J.- denied the assertipn made in the impugned notice by the third respondent. According to th®petitioner, he purchased the subject pioi of iand under a Registered sa!e a'eed dated 14-07-1976 and since then, he has been in lawfuj possession of the said plot as iis absoiute owner. f2) Havina reaard to the pleadina of the oetiijoner and what 's stafed bv' the third res"ondent in the impugned nottee, what arises for deciston- making is a factuai controversv. Tnat controversy cannot be resoived in a summar'/ proceeding uncier A.rticle 226 of the Constitutjon of India. Th< dispuie brought before.fhe Court reiates to titte ofthe suDject piot, whether if is f.h^ nr:-^nffl?f\,r rsf fhs P' ihlift lA/rifk'c r^An^E'fi'nj'srif ^r r^rr'.n^rh/ rtf fhs 3^ iii3^ |i/t\/^4C?i^V Trf(^ Ma^? i irffrrirai^/ ^'u'v^i iiS,^rf i»^^?^lBi;tiijii-^M^ ^i purl^ff^d'^il.y \r'f hj* 'stitlQHSf ss clsimsd bv hi^Tt. Such s disouts csn bs rssoivsd oniy bv wsv of a competent C'vil Court, However, it was appealed to the Court by iearned counsei for the petitioner that fhe.re !s imminent danaer of demoMshing the construction made by him 'm the subject piot of iand and, therefore, the respondent-authorities be prevented from resorting to demoiition for a reasorisfcije titrie so thaf the oetitioner couid wortout nis I^Qsl r©m@diosb^fofQ th^ ji-irisdiction^E Olv'll Oourt, f3) Hsvino hs^fd Issrnsd counssl for ths Dar'tiss. 1 disD-oss 0; ths wnt petftton directing the petitfoner and the respondents to mainfain stattis-quo that obtains as on today with reaarci to the subiect p!ot of 'and for a period of tlve weeks from today. Asl the contentions raised bv the Dartles In the jmpugned nonce and .in the pieadlngs of the petitioner are ieft open to be agitated before the jurisdictionai Civii Court, in the event of the pectioner instituting a suit for ieoal remedv. in the faots and csrcumstances of the case, the parties shaH bear fheir respective costs. (4) Certined ccpy as per rules. Sd/- ChiefJustice W!ea^