u".' a arf C^f^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.l WRIT PETITION'<lM0....5."^.L../2006 PETITIONER ^ ...•••• ^^s .ji^"" ^^;,..-;"" '^•-•"' ^" RESPONDENTS Sakun Bai Keowarth ^ W/o. Shri Dhan Sai Keowarth Aged about 35 years, Up-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Manikpur, Block - Bilha, District Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh / Through : the Collector Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. Sub-Divisional Officer (R ). Bilaspur (C.G.) ^ 3 The Additional Collector.^- Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Tahsildar Bilaspur ^ Tahsil Office Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Rambahoran Keowarth . Aged about 28 years, S/o. Domra Keowarth R/o.Gram Panchayat Manikpur Tahsil & Distt. Bilaspur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE COJMSTITUTION OF INDIA s_< XI-HC-22 3n^T?iT 'i^IWSTI^T sb*litiHf?!T ssr •<<i<<ici<<, ®Tf)u'is,Rfditi^< 311^1 ^acb , HIHWI shHian -•-••-•••-•••••••-•(•• g^- 200 Rtd<A'"""""" 3n^T??(ITWflf?(T £t/ 26.09.2006 Shri Raghvendra Pradha|n Shri Sushil Dubey, Govt. Heard on admission. This oetition has been instance a motion of no confid< namely Rambahoran Keowarth| carried out on 22/8/2006. It is sta confidence^carried out against filed a dispute before the Ad( section (4) of Section 21 of Additional Coltector granted an| thereafter, fixed the matter for Learned counsel for the | 5-10-2006 is beyond the dispute, which was filed on 2^1 provisions of Section 21 (4) of tt|ie the Collector and nobody else| ete. was having the authority to| of sub-section (4) of Section shall decide such disputes refefr that the entire proceedings dra^ jurisdiction. He also argues made either the Up-Sarp( party/respondents in the dispijt point before the said authority stated periocflof fte '=bi<if<l<n-f iiinT ff fei^ <Rl+dl< ^isri^iTsn^T triat i, Counsel for the petltioner. Advocate for the State, |fj!ed by the Up-Sarpanch on whose ^nce was moved against the Sarpanch I- respondent No.5 and the same was that against the said motion of no 1-espondent No.5, the respondent No.5 litiona! Collector, Bilaspur under sub- the Panchayat Raj Adhimyam. The order of interim stay on 13/9/2006 and /10/2006. petitioner argues that the date fixed as 30 days from the date of filing of the /8/2006, therefore, It goes against the said Act. He further argues that on!y that is to say that Additional Coltector entertain the dispute, as the provistons Z1 clearly indicates that the Collector rred to him. In this manner, he argues m by the Additional Collector is without since the respondent No. 5 has not inch or other Panchas as the te, therefore, they cannot agitate this they had to file a petition before jthis^ dnd ^h XI-HC-22 3sr.:qrai?ra', STTiu'is, RK'II'M^ Sll^l ^a<=h irra^TT giiriw " '/" w^ 200 fc|^ •"•••""••• an^TifH' teRTsn^r ofiw ;;~ shyna '"K ^ 3n^T??gTWflf?<T Court. He has prayed fc 13/9/2006(Annexure P-1), whicl Since the main dispu! 4>|i|Id^-1 K14^'^'te'<fl <fa<;AI< ^sri^iTsn^r >r quashment of the order dated lisanorderofstay. is pending before the Additional Coltector, 1 am not inclined to ei]itertain this petition at this interlocutory stage agajnst the interim ord^ However, the points raised can| far as the qu&stion of petitioner| r passed by the Additional Coltector. be decided by the authority itself. So being not made a party jn the dispute is concerned, it is observed tl|iat if so advised, the petitioner may approach the concerned authoifity, where the dispute is pending and flle an application for making Ijier a party and she may also fite an appltoation raising the abov^ pointe particulariy the point of jurisdiction. If such an applic^ shall take it into consideratioh separately or he may dispose c tion is filed, the concerned authority and he may dispose of the same if those objections atongwith the finat order uffimately to be passed by|him in the dispute itself. Since the Legislature hasj !aid a mandate of 30 days, 1deem it proper to further observe that |the concerned authority shal! try to dispose of the dispute at the e^rliest so that the aforesaid mandate given by the Legislature is also r^spected. With the aforesaid obs^rvations, the petition stands finally disposed ofatthe motion stag®..| Sd/- SunUKumarSinha Judge (cft^y®^)