'45” PETITIONER s HlGHnCOURIWOE”JQDIC$Iy&§Q$HATTj§QARH:"BILASmEUR SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI SR. NAYAK, CJ Writ Petition No. 4710 of 1997 Daya Ram son of Mahasingh Gend. vinage Cargohi, tehsii $akti, District Bilaspur. (MR) VERSU$ RESPONDENTS 1. State of MP, through its Secretary, Revenue Deptt. Vallabh Bhawan. Bhopal. CoHector, Bilaspur. S.D.O. Revenue Deptt. Tehsil Sakti, Distt. Bilaspur. 4. Maya Ram son of Vidhya Gbnd Tehsil Sakti, Bilaspur. Present: None for the petitioner. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawai, learned G.A. for the State/respondents 1, 2 & 3. Shri Vishnu Koshta, learned counsel for respondent No. 4. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 22““ Jnne, 2006) Againet the order of the Sub Divisional Officer dated 30.06.1997 (Annexure P/1) impugned in this writ petition, an appeal lies to the juriedictional I Collector under Section 44 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code 1959 (for short “the Code"). 2. Having heard learned counsel for the respondents. l do not find any extraordinary situation or circumstance which could persuade the Court to permit the petitioner straightaway to rush to this Court under Articles 22S . and 227 of the Constitution without exhausting alternative, effective, comprehensive legal remedies provided under the Code. lt needs to be M é noticed that not ohly an appeal lies against the impugned order under Section 44 of the Code, the petitioner can also further avaii legal remedy by way of a revision to the Board of Revenue under Section 50 of the Code. Above all, the dispute brought before the Court, among legal questions‘ would aiso involve factual controversies. Such factual controversies cannot be resolved in a summary proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution. Looking from any angte, this is not a tit case to be undertaken for adjudication under Article 226 of the Constitution. in that view of the matter, l dismiss the writ petition, however, reserving liberty to the petitioner to avaii of appeal remedy provided under Section 44 of the Code. it is directed that if the petitioner tiles an appeal within a period of ’ one month from today, the jurisdictional Collector is directed to dispose of such appeal on merit. in accordance with law, without reference to the limitation. The interim order passed by this Court shall remain in force for a period of six weeks from today. It is open for the petitioner to move appropriate appiication before the Collector for interim order/s No costs. i z T; ”*7 'i, Sdl- Chief Justice