ii}^ *L WIWsa '^ HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR WRIT PETITION No. 5S6 of2001 PETITIONERS : 1. Mohan Oond aged about 54 years, SonofBudhram. 2. Smt. Rukhmam Bai aged about wife of Shri Mohan Gond 3. Brij Bihari, aged about 39 years, soa of Rama Shankar. 4. Smt. Shail Kumari aged about 35 years, wife of Shri Brij Bihari. 5. Janaklal aged about 32 years Son ofChunuklal 6. Smt. .Imla Bai aged about 32 years wife of Shri Janaklal 7. Pawan Kumar ^ed about 41 yeais Son of Shri Parasram Yadav . 8. Snit. Hira Bai, agedabout 35 yrs. Wife ofShri Pawan Kumar 9. Bharat, aged about 35 years, Son ofShri Jodhram. 10. Smt Rajbat, aged about 28 yrs., Wife of Shri Bharat All are resident of village Math Pureaa, Raipur, Tahsil and District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS : 1. The State of ChhattisgaA Through the Collector, Raipur. 2. Shri M.L.Gupta, Additional Tahsildar, Tahsil Qfficer, Raipur, CUhattisgarii. 3. Shri Rupchand Shamia, Reveaue Inspector, Tahsil Office, Raipur. Chhattisgarh. PETmON UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTTTUT10N OF INDIA. SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. AsnilMitri, J. Present: Shri B.P.Shamia, Advocateforthe petitioner. Shri Arvind Dubey, Paael Lawyer for tiie State/respondent No. 1 . RESPONDENTS ^ ^€. 'f '^ES-^ ''53 r^] B-^y ORALORDER (Passed on 17"' day of November, 2007) ^^3*:i:f?t^(^^f^;. 1. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were allotted the land in dispute under Rajiv Gandhi Ashraya Yojna, 1998, on lease for a period of30 years bythe erstwhile unified State ofMadhya Pradesh, inthe year 1998. 2. In this petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuing a writ ofmandamus, directing the respondents to desist from ousting or dispossessing from the plots ofland allottedto tiie petitioners. 3. The petitioners have further prayed that tiie respondents be restrained from taking any coercive steps or using force to demolish the strueture/houses. 4. This Court on 23.04.2001 passed the interim order that "ifthe petitioners are in possession ofthe land or plots in question as oa fliis date, tiiey shall not be ousted nor shall their house or structure be demolished until further orders from this Court . 5. Shri Arvind Dubey, leamed panel lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1 fairly submits that no steps for demolition ofthe structure or dispossession of the petitioners from the lands in question shall be taken before afFording proper opportunity ofhearing to the petitioners, in accordance with law. 6. In view of the foregoing, nolhing survives in tfae matter. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. ----—-—-- Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge