C ^ ~('yo IN THE HIGH COTJRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NOK.J'.1:'^."OF 2006 PETITIONER: .\^-^. .<•*" /~y ••• ^sy VJ%^>>" ..-^^>" ^yy ^•^ Smt Renuka Sahu, aged 40 years W/o Sri Niranjan singh Sahu, Sarpanch of Village - Attang, Tah- Kumd , Distt.Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS ^'RESPONDENTS A. State of Cbhattisgarh, ^2. 3. ^ 4,. Through Collector Dharutati. Distt- Dhamtari (CG) The Sub- Divisional Officer,Dhaintari Secretary Gram Panchayat, Attang Tah- Kurud, Distt- Dhamtari, Through Sarpanch Prathmik Machhua Sahkari Samiti Attang through President Dindayal Tarak R/o Vill- Attang ,Tah- Kumd Distt- Dhamtari [CG] !^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. XI-HC-22 sn^r^ R-li't) 3IT^T shtii'ti gfer f/l^ <K 3^ '*II<4|C1<<, ®T(1y'l(o,fsldlti^ 3T(^?TTSra? HWWI !h*1ich --•••-••••••••••••••• ^pj. -200 fa^s:"""""""" 3TT^T5RITW;Hf?cT 04,09,2006 Vaishn^v wlth Shri Ashok Shri N.K. Aarawal, Dy. A.i Heard on admission. The petitioner, who is thi| this petition being aggrieved Upper Collector, by which, ttie | of the tanks of Gram Panchayjat SamiV, Attang. Learned counsel for the the tanks were allotted to 4 of cancellation of the eariier s|l therefore, the Gram Panchayat filed by the Sarpanch of the said Apemsalofthe petition show that in the facts and been cancelled may have been] not fte Sarpanch of the Gram of allotment to the earlier no focys standi to file a Writ P^t grievance. 1 am not inclined to Sarpanch in her personal The petition has no merit staae itself. Counsel G. for the State. allott4es capadtv ^raf?pft7 WRff ff te^t rfSffzrc ^arfwran^r for the petitioner. i^ Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, has filed he order dated 6/6/2006 passed by the Isaid authority has directed for distribution chaviat, Attang to Prathmik Macchua Sahkari ll>etitioner submits that earlier to this order, difiyrent societies and this order has an effect i|ltotment made by the Gram Panchayat, is agarieved and this petition has been Gram Panchayat. |and the records annexed ttierewith would circilmstances, the societies whose lease has ]the aggrieved partyto file the petition and Ipanchayat, who has only signed the order and in this manner, is petitioner has itition in her personal capacity for the said ac<mit this petition for hearing flled by the and the same is dismissed at the motion Sd/- SunUKumarSinha Judge L y