QjlGHgOURT D£gynglCATURE CHHATTISQARH: BILA§PUR .mm.m.. DIVISION BENCH CDRAM : HON’BLE SHRI SR. NAYAK, CJ & HON’BLE SHR! DR. DESHMUKH, J. Writ Petition No.4514 of 2006 PETITIONERS 1. Aivez Kumar Dewangan, s/o Phul Singh, aged 32 years, R/o. Trimurty Nagar Ward No.5, Birgaan,‘Up-Tehsil Dharsiwa, Tehsil Raipur (C.G.) 2. Yogendra Soianki, aged about 44 years, son of Late $hri Ratan Lal Solanki, R/o. Ravabhata Birgaon, Distt. Raipur(CG) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. 0m Prakash Dewangan, son of Shri Kanhiya La! Dewangan, aged 37 years, President Nagar Pnachayat, Birgaon, Distt.‘ Raip‘ur (C.G.) 3. Jugal Kishore Devangan, aged 27 years, son of $aligram Dewangan, R/c. village Sakri (Kharora), Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4. Couector. Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 5. Additional Tehsildar, Dharsiwan, Distt. Raipur (0.6.) Nagar Palika Parishaci. Birgaon, through its Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Birgaon, Tehsil Dhariswan, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 7. State Election Commissicner, through Chief Election Ofhcer, Raipur (C.G.) Present: Dr. N.K. Shukla, learned Sr. Adv. with Ms. Ritu Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri Prashant Mishra, learned Additional Adv. General with Shri Utkarsh Verma, learned Dy. G.A. for the State. RESPONDENTS 1 . ORAL 0RDE§ ,gPassed on 2mugust, 2006) The following oral order of the Court was passed by SR. NAYAK, CJ . ._2_ m this PIL, the complaint of the petitioners, who are the residents of Ravanbhata, Birgaon, is that the 2‘“ respondent is misusing his position as the President of Nagar Panchayat, Bargaon. and he highhandedly encroached the subject iand which is said to be a Government land and is trying to put up construction despite the direction issued by the 5‘“ respondent not to do so. This allegation made by the petitioner is squarely denied by the 2“ respondent in‘Annexure P/3, a copy of which is produced at page 15 of the material papers. Be that as it may. we think that the ends of justice would be met by directing the respondents~State Authorities to find out whether the 2nd respondent has encroached the Government land and is trying to put up construction thereon and if they find the allegation made by the petitioners is correct, then, to take. appropriate, prompt and corrective measures to safeguard the public property. in that View of the matter, we dispose of the writ petition directing the omcial respondents-State Authorities to find out whether the allegation made by the petitioners against the 2“ respondent is justified and if it is so, then, to take immediate remedial measures, in accordance with law, to protect the subject Government land. No costs. (2) lt is open for the petitioners to seek refund of security deposit made in this Court on the basis of the nnding of the respondents-State Authorities as gab)? R directed above. i Sdl- Sdl‘ D.R. Deshmukh Chief Justice Judge