%»%&[£ a3.4^?^riil^»c(1 900' c . ^ • -~ WRIT PETITION (Cl No. 120 iV^ ,t.\"..-^/' cy ^^ Prabhavati @ Prabha Kumari, aged about 38 years, W/o Late Mahipal Sahu, R/o Village Sagarpur, Distt. Koriya Sandip Kuraar aged about 16 years, S/o Mahipal, being Minor through mother Prabhavati @ Prabha Kumari, aged about 38 years, W/o Late Mahipal Sahu, R/o Village Sagarpur, Distt. Koriya ^° 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur 2 The Collector, Distt. Koriya, Baikunthpur 3. Sub Divisional Officer (R), Baikunthpur Distt. Koriya. 4. Tahsildar, Baikunthpur Distt. Koriya. 5. Municipal Corporation, through its Chief Municipal Officer, Baikunthpur, Distt. Koriya pwif^«^ie*^"y..*:;^ mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^r^ PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (0 No. 2936 of2011 Prabhavati @ Prabha Kumari. RESPONDENTS VERSUS The State ofGhhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri. J. Present: Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Government Advocate for the State/ respondent No. 1 to 4. Shri Anumeh Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondentNo. 5. ORDER fORAL) (Passed on 191i day ofOctober, 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on a portion ofthe land ofthe petitioner bearing Khasra No. 369/1, area 0.048 hectare situated at Patwari Halka NTo. 6, village Sagarpur, Baikunthpur, District Koria, th.e respondent authorities, vvithout acquiring the same in accordance with law, are raising construction. Thus, the respondent authorities may be restrained from raising any construction and further to compensat^ the petitioner for the damage caused to the property ofthe petitioner. 2. On tUe other hand, Shri Sao, learned counsel appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 to 4 submits that the construction is being raised not on the alleged portion of the land, which according to the petitioner, belongs to him but the same is on other land. -3. The petitioner, by way of rejoinder submits that the revenue records clearly indicate that the construction is on the land of the petitioner. . '^ "^^ "^^ '"^ssex'^"'-" 4. Be that as it may, the dispute asto whether the consbTiction raised by the respondent authorities is on the land ofthe petitioner or any other land, cannot be decided by this Court. However, in the interest of justice, the Tahsildar, Baikunthpur is directed to examine the matter and demarcate the land clearly indicating the portion of the land belonging to the petitioner, if an application is made by the petitioner, as early as possible, preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of reeeipt of the application. On demarcation, if it is found that fhe construction has been raised on the land ofthe petitioner and the same has not been acquired in accordance with law, the said construction may be considered for demolition by the Collector, Koria, thereafier. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. Sd/- 1 Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Amlt