1 75 D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO. 753/2009. Dilawar Khan Vs. Municipal Board, Nagaur & Ors. .. Date of Order :: 19th February 2010. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. SAPRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. Sunil Mehta, for the appellant. ..... BY THE COURT: This is an intra-court appeal filed by the writ petitioner of Writ Petition No. 1339/2009 under Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules against an order dated 25.02.2009 passed in the aforementioned writ petition by the learned Single Judge. 2. While dismissing the writ petition of the appellant, the learned Single Judge made the following observations:- “No documentary evidence has been produced on record to show that the petitioner is in possession of the premises in question from last 40 years. It is a matter of evidence. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner may seek remedy by way of filing suit before the Civil Court.” 3. Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant and on perusal of the record of the case, we are inclined to concur with the view expressed by the learned Single Judge. 2 4. In our view, the only remedy available to the appellant in the facts of this case is to file a civil suit before the competent Civil Court in respect of grievance which he has made in the writ and claim appropriate reliefs including the relief of damages for the loss which he is alleged to have sustained. 5. So far as writ jurisdiction of the High Court is concerned, it being extraordinary in nature, it will not be possible for the High Court to examine the issue on facts and evidence. In our writ jurisdiction, it is neither permissible nor legal nor advisable. If we do it, we will be expanding our extraordinary jurisdiction which we refrain from doing so. 6. Needless to observe in case, if the appellant files any civil suit then, the competent Civil Court will adjudicate the rival claims of the parties and will pass appropriate judgment and decree in accordance with law. 7. We, however, make it clear that the Civil Court would not be influenced by any of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the impugned order because, admittedly, the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition did not decide the issue involved in the case on merits. 8. With the aforesaid observations and liberty, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed in limine. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. (A.M. SAPRE),J. /Mohan/