j_ ttO- ,t?,. • /». • t\' ~ , •»,t\'^ ft"'' f co/ .-3 IN THE HIOH COURT OP JUD2CATURS AT BIIASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION N0. 2&J-<^ Qp 2001 BETWEffl l.y Ramesb. KLtmar s/o Narayan Hirmi, aged about 42 years, occupation cul-tivation, resldent; of Village Biiinkarihar, Pa-twari Halka No.l 3,Talisil and Thana Dondip Lohara, District Burg • 2.^ Kanhayee Ram S/o Sarwan Haiba, aged about 56 years, occupation cultivation, resiaent of Village Bhlmkanhar, Patwari HalkaNo.13, IBhsil and Thana Dondplohara, Distric-t Eurg « ^•;"" :<..^'. b^ --^.-:-<:^ " ,0 >9 PSTITIONERS \^' ^A' A N D 1. ^•'Ihe State of ChhattA^garh, fbrough -the Secretary Department of PanAayat, S.K.Buildlng, Raipur. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Ihe Oammissloner, Raipur Division,Raipur. The GollectOr, rurg, District Ourg. _.^^ ^^ i-y Ihe Naib 'IShsildar, V\aM l2<yr<^i.t^^rs+ 3>t,'v^- ^-O- 3>ev»»^ Ihe Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat aiim Karihar, Tahs il Bondilohara,District Diirg. Smt. Durga Ihaltur V!/o Shri Soran Singh 'Siakur, resident of a-iirrikanhar, Patwari Halka No.l3, R.I.Cirel®Khertha, Tahsil Eiondilohara, Dlstrict Diirg. RESPCMDENTS .WRII' PETXTION UHDBR ARTICLES 226/227 OS' It® CONSTI'IU'rICH 0? INDIA ,&'1 <•"°' '('•y 'y ^ jfcx^n" ,tr. "^^ . '''if:'^ ^ 1:&31J ^^^y .^:/?..,?^.;...?^.L^.I.<?1. SiWTT^? (-^f^^) IIS<1 ^il 3T^T ^>)4 'TOIIW flffia 3iI^I ^»i^<'l41t's^^ ^ f^^t <f<[«-^F< ^3ifOT3lAT? Miss. Sonia Kuldeep, c.oui]isel Shri V.V.S. Moorthy, Dy^ None for respondentNo,5| It is reported that the petiti In the retum filed bv the 3ias been made in para 2 ofthe r^tiirn: Thcit, the facts ofthe ca\ with regarcl fo encroachi^ the petitioner from the co»j Dttimdi Lohara had 24/11/2001 (Annexwe Jt nofice dated 24/11/2001 proceeding witiated aga^ closed by vide order dat^ dated 29/09/2007 is beilj R/l". In view of the above stall U.sun'ives for adjudication in this t for the petitioners. |\..G. for respondents No.l to 4. ioners have died. respondent the follovving averment ^e ca'e that qper receivmg ffie report s^ent in the govemment kind against ^cefTied Pahvari, theNaib Tcihsildar, is^ued the impugned notice dated. \/]}. In piirsv.ant to the imptigned (Annexiire P/l), the encroachrtient :^~isi the petitioner has alreac!}' been ^d 29/09/2007. A copy of the order }ig amiexed here'wiih as Annexare f:emeni maae in me retuni, noiairig \vni petition. TOB^T ^tsftTgpinSI;,.raH-<PTO—>FS/147—2/2010—1,00,000. XI-HC—78 's's^ -<i]<iiy, ®TTly'i6,fsid!y4,< ..^..'..i?.:..^..':....^..L'?:/2. sn^T'T^r (liclid°<<?^ 3iR^qit ^sn ^pn^i spfrsi<^ wnwsfOTsii^i ^Rt^ill'l 'W^ff ^' t^ISt <M^K '^aifinsn^i ;r It is accordingly dispos proceedings for removing th^ undertaken by the respondent/aij at libeil^' to move this court afre] With this obsen'ation- the sd of as infructuous. However, if irs of the petitioners is thorities, the said petitioners shall be ,h. petition stands disposed. Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge