H IGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASF’UR WRIT PETE-HON (C) NO. 2102 OF 2008 PETlTiONER Bharat Pekra, S/o Ram Prasad Pekra, ageé 25 years, Caste Kanwar (Adivasi), Rio Si£apun Poiice Station $i€apur, Districi Surguja {CG}. %§L Versus RE$PONDENTS 1. Sta€e of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, ¥ Urban Davelopment, Dau Kalyah Singh Bhawan, Mantra‘aya, Raipur (CG). 2. Praident, Nagar Panchaya‘t, Pathaigaen, D§strict Jashpur (CG) 3. Chiaf Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayai, Pathaigaon, Districi Jashpur (CG). 4. Tikeshwar Yadav, S/e Damrudhar Yadav, Manager, Gurukul Mahavidyaiaya, Pathaigaon, District Jashpur (CG). v 5. State of Chhattisgarh, thmugh Coiiector, Jashpur, District Jashpur (CG}. (Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution 0f india) Singie Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- ShriAnand Keshamrani.counseiforthe petitioner. L Shri Vivek Sharma, Panei Lawyer for the State. $hri Ravish Verma, ceunsei for the respondent No.4. ORDER ORAL (Passed on this i?‘ day of Juiy, 2009) ‘i. Heard iearned oounsei for the parties. By this petition, the petitioner seeks an order in the nature of perpetuai injunction against the Nagar Panohayat, Pathaigaon, Bistrict Jashour, on the around that vide resoiution dated 20—12-2607, approach road of Gurukui Mahavidyaiaya was sanctioned for construction of oermanent road. (OJ iand beionos to the oetitioner and the same cannot be interfered with even for construction of permanent roaci. According to the iearneoi oounsei appearing for the petitioner, the \i Be that as 5% may, in the insiant peiitian’titie, ownea’shijg o§ the Sana §n question is invoived. Even the relief of gram of pergpeiuai injunction cannot be granted by th§s Court. There is n9 order Q”/ passed by éhe Nagar Panchayat. Only {esolutisn %s under chaHenge without estabiishing the ewnership of the iand in question. This requires investigation, as there are question of facts wiih regard to ownership of ihe eroperty and aonetruction of 2 read. Even etherwise no injunction can be granted by this Court. in View of foregoing, this writ petition i3 dismissed, as not maintainabie. No order asto costs. Consequentiy, interim order nassed eariier stands vacated. Hewever, liberty ie reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to the appropriate forum that may be i Gowri :9. 3 a jurigdiwwai CW“ COW, if so advised. Sdl- ‘ 'Satish K. Agnihotri Judge i xmau‘a mA