W HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) No. 5061 of2008 PETITIONFRS : 1. Chandtabhan Bhatia, (C.B.Bhatia) S/o Late Shri Devi Dayal Bhatia, aged about 78 years, R/o Vaisali Nagar; MIG 37, Supela: Bhilai, Tab. & Distt. Durg (C.G.) 2. Prannath S/o Late Ramchandra, Aged about 77 years, R/o New Khumipar, Bhilai, Tah. & Dim. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through — SecretaJy (Administration) D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Collector, Durg Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agg’gotri. J. Present: Shri Jitendra Gupta, Advocate for the petitioners. RESPONDENTS : '1. 3 The Tahsildar, Dhamdha, Distt. Durg (C.G.)‘ Shri- Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 12m day of September, 2008) The petitioners, who are ex-army men of the Indian Army have tiled this petition for the following reliefs: "1().l That, the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to make an orcler/direction to the respondents to hand over the, allotted land in the favour of petitioners. 10.2 It is therefore prayed to the Hon’ble Court kindly pass a suitable order/direction in the favour of the petitioners for the ends. ofjustice. 10.3 Any other writ or direction which ever the Hon’ble Court may deem fit to be granted in the circumstances ofthe case.” The grievance ofthe petitioners is that the Sub~Divisional Officer, Durg vide his order dated 1.6. 1992 made allotment of agricultural land in favour of the petitioners and other army men and as per the order o the Collector and the I’resident, District Sainik Welfare Board, Durg, aiter allotment of the land, the petitioners have also paid premium and the allotted land stands recorded in their names in the revenue papers and Patta has also been issued in favour of the petitioners however, the possession of the allotted land has not been _vm delivered to the petitioners. 0n application of the petitioners, the Sub- Divisiona] OEcer, Durg vicie his memo dated 19.02.2007 directed the. Tahsildar, Dhamda to enquire into the matter as to why the possession of the agricultural land allotted tothe petitioners has not been handed over to them. The civil suit filed by one K.V.Filif was also dismissed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Class I, Durg vide judgment dated 9. 12.2004 passed in Civil Suit No. 89-A/2003 with an observation that the land in question has already been allotted to the other ex-army men. Despite the above, facts the Revenue authorities have not delivered the possession. Shri Harit, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State submits that with regard to allotment of land in favour of the petitioners, there is some mistake in the allotment order that may be examined by the authorities. He thither submits this petition may be disposed of with suitable direction to the concerned Revenue Authority for doing the needful in accordance with law within specified period. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, having regard to the pleading in the petition as also the documents annexed with this petition, the instant petition is disposed of with a liberty to the petitioners to make representation before the Collector, Durg/respondent No. 2 raising all the gievances raised in this petition alongwith a copy ofthis order Within a period of one month from today. The Collector, Durg, aher receipt of such representation shall decide the same within a further period of four months in accordance with law. The petition is accordingly disposed of. No order asto costs. Consequently, I.A. No. 1, application for grant of interim relief, stands disposed of. Sdl- ‘Satish K Agnihom ' Judge