c-^1-3-20 f^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(C) N0. ^(A^ /2010 fS.B.) PETITIONER <' RESPONDENTS/ Non-appellants I^VA^- ^••<s^y"^ ^^^^o^--"" ?'^^ AS" 2. 3. B.P. NaKle S/o Pundil Nakle, aged about 53 years, R/o 51/1, Radhika Nagar, Supela, Bhilai, Thasil & Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - The Secretary (Administration) D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector, Durg Distt. - Durg (C.G.) 3. Tahsildar, Dhamdha Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As mentioned in the cause title above. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS As mentioned in the cause title above. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THIS PETITION IS MADE. The petition is not made against any order. The ^y HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0 N0.4670 OF 2010 PETITIONER B.P. Nakle RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Government Advocate for the State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 20th day ofAugust, 2010) 1. The petitioner, who is ex-army man of the Indian Army has filed this petition for the following reliefs:- 10.1 To call the entire records of the case from the respondent. 10.2 To pass a suitable order/direction in favour of the petitioner for the end ofjustice. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner together with cost of the petition. 2. Grievance of the petitioner is that the Sub-Divisional Officer, Durg vide his order dated 04/06/1992 (Annexure - P/3) made allotment of agricultureland in favour of the petitioner and other army men and as per the order of the Collector and the President, District Salnik Welfare Board, Durg, after allotment of the land, the petitioner has also paid premium and the allotted land stands recorded in his name in the revenue papers and Patta has also been issued in favour of the petitioner, however, the possession of the allotted land has not been delivered to the petjtioner. On application of the petitioner, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Durg, vide his memo dated 13/05/2008 directed Tahsildar, Dhamda to enquire into the matter asto why the possession of agricultural land allotted '-'!'''i.l!.-:*"j;*IIW-i'.!!E'M> <^^^:^^'a. -^i:i^^ih^^' 4. to the petitioner has not been handed over to him. Despite the above, facts the Revenue authorities have not delivered the possession. Shri Bhatia, learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State, submits that with regard to allotment of land in favour of the petitioner, there is some mistake in the allotment order that may be examined by the authorities. He further submits this petition may be disposed of with a suitable direction to the concerned Revenue Authority for doing the needful in accordance with law within specified period. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. The instant petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioner to make a representation before the Collector, Durg/responden.t No.2 raising all the grievances raised in this petition along with a copy of this order within a period of one month from today. The Collector, Durg, after receipt of such representation shall decide the same within a further period of four months in accordance with law, on its own merits. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agaikotr Judge 4 ^' ^^^^^S^S^ass^ss^SMiiMia —