HFFfTu 8w 3112mm wwwra f§am1rxr (8.11) WP. (C)No.29‘3 /2011 s.B. /,Wk: agrn? 311193111 W Er. §$WERI EH a'mW 38 arxf fW W 35. 1 EMT 37W @631 a? fEEgT fwaT-f%ramg§r (EFL) .. Wg EWE; Ema—4 gm —' 1. What f§amga fEar~f§mgR (E31) 2/ a§f%r¢n1f’m aféram? (WW) @aET, a—g. Féraa, f%raT féramg? (W1) 3/ mam, / @3’5? avg. 1%GET, Paw @u‘vmqg? (mi) 4. 11E: Hm qrf%{?m a@mr@,, :m‘xr WPQWT firFgT faErT—f%mmgq (EFL) I 5. QWGI mvéa fEraT ‘xr-a. aTEgTq‘TH WéH W m3 i5. 1 3m Hm, 1%?57 fEaT 1%Frmg? (WT) .. .. WWII UTa‘gt/fra un‘%I$T 3Fa11‘a agith: 2264227 m‘m‘m mmrrm HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR (Writ Petition underArticIe 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Rajendra Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.VIS. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General forthe State. ORDER IORAL) (Passed on this 13m day of July, 201 1) Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Bilha, District Bilaspur, to stop the alleged construction on the Government land. -3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that if the construction is allowed to be carried out on the land in dispute, the easementary rights of the petitioner of passage, air, etc. may be affected . 4. Be that as it may, since the instant petition involves the disputed question of facts and even otherwise for the abovestated rights, the competent forum is jurisdictional civil Court, not the writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 5. As an upshot, the writ petition is shorn of merit and is accordingly dismissed at the motion stage itself. However, the petitioner is at liberty to take recourse to any other forum, whi‘ch 'may be available to him under the provisions of,law, if so advised. -——————* ‘ Sd/- Gowri ‘i j Satish K.Agnihotri i i Judge WRIT PETITION (C) NO.3719 OF 2011 PETITIONER Pramod Kumar Upadhyay Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others