^ <?. ^ . ( ^ IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.6.) W.P. r227)No.<5<r?^2^of 2011 f s' PETITIONER y AppJ^wviV VERSUS RESPONDENTS :1. /\4^ ftp(Ac\^A- '^ -....^ '/ 2. ^ Smt. Hemant Kumari bewangan, aged about 33 years, W/o Shri Ballu bewangan, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Mulmula, TGhsil-Bemetara, bistrict-burg (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Panchayat bepartment. b.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C6) The Commissioner, Raipur (C.G.) o•^w WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INblA ^- OW^ T^e petitioner named above most respectfully begs to submit 'v •• ^-7\ as under:- , L/_^.La/_.-_ _._.._._.... ,_.. . „ „...,..___...._.. ^..^ <^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W^Petition(227LNo^2572pf2QU PETITIONBR Applicaiat RBSPONDBNTS Non-applicaat Smt. Hemant Kiiraari Dewangan S^RSUS State of Chhattisgarh & another (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OP.MDIAI (SB; Hon'ble Mr. N.K. Afiarwal, J.l Present : Shri Prateek Shamia, Advocate for the petitioner. ShnArun Sao, Govt. Advocate for fhe State/respondents. ORAL ORDBR (Passedoa 12.05.2011) 1, Heard on adiriission. 2, The iastant petition, filed under Article 227 ofthe Constitiition of India, catls ia question the legality and propriety of order dated 25.04.2011, passed by fhe Commissioner, Raipiir, in Revision No. 217/B-121/2010-11. 3. Brief facts of the case are: petitioner challenged the show caiise notice issued by the prescribed aiithorily ie. Siib Divisional Ofiicer, Bemetara, on 05.03.2011 under Section 40 ofPanchayati Raj Adhiaiyaixi, 1993, before the Collector. Collector dismissed the petitioner's appUcation. 4, Petitioner went m revision before the Commissioner. The Commissioner passed statuo quo order and tlxed fhe case for hearmg on 13.06.2011. Thereafter, objectors namely Dhanmi Dehre, Up-Sarpanch and Secretary, Grain Panchayat, Mzilmiila preferred aa objection ia the case by filing applicatjon iinder Order 1 Rule 10 of CPC for adding tliem as a party and tbr vacatmg stay order granted in petitioner's tavour. ^o To hear above applications, matter has been fixed on 12,05,2011 vide inipugned order. On that date after aflforditig opportiinity of heaang to the petitioner, leanaed Commissioner will decide objectors applications and will re-tax the case for usual hearing on any ofher suitable date. Therefbre, there is no need to interfere ia tlie above order. It is weU setUed prmciple of law that this Court, in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227ofthe Constitdtion oT India, should refrain itself from interiering with the order passed by fhe Court below, except in siich cases where per^ersity, illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional error is writ large on the face offhe record, which is not ia the present case. The petition has no merit and the same is accordmgly dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- I N. K-Agarwal Judge Sahu