a M )a IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) RESPONDENTS /1) Manoj Kumar S/o. late Indralal PETITIONER ; / @ / Indramal Nihichlani, aged about 37 years, R/o. Tilda Camp, Tahsil Tilda, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Versus Union of India, through the secretary, Ministry of Labour and $§R§LE %EM3H % 5:96? Rehabilitation (Department of Rehabilitation) New Delhi State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Rehabilitation Department Mantralaya, DKS Bhawanf GE Road, Raipur (C.G.) ‘ ' Collector (Nazul Branch) :3) Nazul, Collectorate Building G.E.Road, Raipur (C.G.) Naib Tahsildar, Tilda (Neora), Tahsil Tilda, District Raipur (C.G.) WP C No 0f 2010 W? HEGH COURT OF CHHA’ITISGARH AT BXLASPUR WRIT PETITIGN (C) No. 5967 of2G10 FETI’HONER : Manoj Kumar. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : Unian 0f Endia & Others. WRH PLTITIOV U VDhR ART ILLE 226 Ob THE CONS? HIH ION OF Ex DAA SB: H011’ble Sin‘i Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: b‘m H B Agrawal bemm Advocate Wlth Ms Pragya 5mgh Advocak for {ha putmoner 31m Feuzm Mlrza Asmztant 5011mm General tor the Unlon of Indm Shn M P Bhatla DV (I A for tha State/respondent NO 2t04. ORDER ORAL) (Passed or; 20 day 0f Octeber, 20 10) 1‘ The petitioaer is aggrieved by inaction on the pait of the Nazul Ofticer, wherein it was observed that. under the scheme, pursuant to the direction of the State Govemment, rehabilitation of the displaced persons from West Pakistan, shall be done within a period of three months in Tikia Camp, which is evident from the order oftlie Nazul Oiiicer, Raipur at the reverse side of page No. 12 of the petition. Thereafter, no action has been taken till date. The petitioner has further made a representation to the Collectoii on 11.03.2010 (Annexure PM) seeking a ciirection to the Nazul Officer. to do the neerifu1 as early as possible. b) passed by the Nazul Officer i.e. a Revenue Officer. Against that, the petitioner has statutorwi£omm available i.e. the Collector, may be Commissioner or the Board of Revenue. The petitioner, Without Be that as it may, this is a dispute which arises from the order \ 2 \i‘ ha approaching to other authorities as provided in $tatuto1y hierarchy, s approached this Court t0 invoke extraordinaly Writ jurisdiction ofthis Court under Article 226 oftiig Constitution of India. There is no extraordinaiy circumstances necessitating entertaim‘nent of this petition. Accordingly, this petition is di However grievance of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders possible in accordance with law. smissed at the motion stage itself. , it is expected that the Collector shall 100k into the , as early as i Sd/- Satlsh K. Agnihotri ‘ Judge