^- ^- ^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION 227 N0. l^63> 72010 SUWl.E BENGH^ PETITIONER Chhattisgarh Maratha Samaj through Its General Secretary l..--"^' J^-- Sambhaji Rao Ghatge Late u>i^$"1^ Neelkanth Rao Ghatge aged about i?.^.' p't"'-" 3^ \y -.\)\- .\\7 52 years, Bajrang Chowk, Mathpara, Raipur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1) . Dr. Anil Dubey S/o Shri Chandra Prakash Dubey aged about 43 years R/o Priyadarshani Nagar, Raipur 2) State of Chhattisgarh through Collector, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ 8gi [( t 1( u essBfis^ieaa^'-'S-i-.^w^sfi.^ •sn^iqn •ams?!^i VAKALATNAMA ?^T "4i'41<rf<T, ®tlly-i|(c,i^TRTy: [.^..:U.^.J.^ sn^i 1!ra%- (lcif-i«i<^) ct)l'sl[<'l<ill M|»fciy^ 'f^^l if^R^K ^i'STRnsi^r SB : Hon'Me Shri Manindra Mohan Shridastatfa..l. p^tltion Reventie 16-04-2010 SW Sachin Singh Rajput, counsel for tl| ShrtVinod Tekam, Panel Lawyerforth^ Thts peftion has been filed by the (Annexure P-5) passed by Ihe Board of has been dlsmissed. Grievance of the petitioner is that in wherein pettioner alteged encroachment by re^ encroachment was confirmed. However, laterl aufhority (Commissioner, Raipur), an order of i According to the petitioner, thls order was pettioner. On petition filed before the Boari) dismlssed the same. Leamed cou.isel for ttie (^ was passec' on 23A16/09, various orders have| fited by respondent No.1 conceming the disput^ of injunction was rejected by the Trial was later on withdrawn. All Ihese aspects ha\| Board of Revenue and the petition has been| been filed. Taking into consideration friat after 23BB109 by fte appellate airthority (Commissitjner, Civil Court where Injunction has been refus^d, Ralpur) shall dedde the appeal expeditjously, receipt of copy of Ihis order. If 1he appeal peftioner shall be at liberiy to pray for vacatn|g the appellate authority. With the aforesaid direcfon, this petltlo|i Court adalnst e pettioner. StateA-espondent No.2 on advance copy. tltioner aggrieved by order dated 2/12/09 i, Ralpur whereby the pefitioner's petition t|ie matter of dispute with respondent No.1 (pondent No.1, demarcation was made and jon, on matter being taken to the appellate |status quo has been passed on 23D6B9. [^ssed in the absence of counsel for the of Revenue. the Board of Revenue has (^titloner submlts that after the Interim order |been passed by the Civil Court in the suit t^ between the partles. Appllcation for grant which an appeal was preferred whlch (e not been taken into consideration by the dismissed against which this petifon has [passing interim order of stetus quo on ;()ner, Ralpur), the dlspute has been taken to I, the appellate authority (Commissioner, (ireferably within 3 months from the date of |is not decided within the stiputated tlme, statys quo order granted on 23A)6/09 by is finally disposed of. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge CTWte<']i().!iyiR!',;A-.]i;!rra--FS/147—;'2010—1,00,000.