1N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHA’H‘ISGAKH ‘ BILASPUR rit Patition No 1616 M2005 Petitioners W Rajesn Jain, sjo Shu’ Dhanya Kumar Jain, agsd absut 37 years. 2. Shri Pannaial Jain, s/o Late Shri Balramchand Jain, age 58 y§ars. 3. Jawaharlal Jain, sio Shn‘ Balramchand Jam, agc 46 years. A11 r/ 0 Manendragmh, Tshsil Manendragarh, Distt. Koxia, (LG. Versus Respondents 1. The State of Chhattisgarh; through the Secretary, Urban Administration Department, Raipur, C.G. The Municipal Council Manendragarh Distt. Koria, C.G., through the Chief Municipal 9 Ofiicer. ha 3. The Nazui OL‘ticer, Manendragarh, Disirict Kozia, C. q. 1‘ 01 WRIT PE’l‘l’l‘ON UNDER ARTICLE 226/ 227 OF THE CONSTETUTION OF INDIA. (SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotn‘ J.) Shri A. K. Prasad, Advocaee for the petitioners. Shri A. $ Kachwaha, Deputy Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 and 3 Shri Dhanesh Shrirastava, Advocate for the. respondent No.2. ORDER (Passed on this 17th Day of oétober, 2008) This petition invoives disputed questigns of facts.‘ Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that as per Bandobast No. 84 ‘(Annexure P/ l) the petitioners” forefathers were shown as owner of the pond (’l‘alab} namely the petition schedule land. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ municipal council submits that the land in dispute does not belong to the petitioners and they do not have any right over the said pond as the same is the property of the municipal councn, Manendragarh. z ¢ l$/ 2. Without recording anv iinding in regard to th€ nature of the petition schedu’lé land, this Court is not in position to demrmine the disputed question of facts. The determination requires examinatmn ol’ documents and witnesses, the same is not possible m this wnt junsdmtion. ’l‘nus, the petition is dismissed as not maintamabie. Consequently, M(W)P No. 1419/ 2003 and other pending applicants are also dismissed However, the liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach the jurisdictional civil Court for determination of their rights and thereafter taking compensation, if any, from the municipal council, if so advised. 4. It is directed that the municipal council will not take any steps for a period oi' two weeks from today to enable the petitioners to take recourse to the appropriate jurisdictional civil Court. i 7 Sd/- o . Satish K.Agn’ihotri L ' Judge Thakur Wmwmwv‘