r^-" HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR SiNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHR! S.R. NAYAK, CJ. WRiT PtTITiON No,23S8 OF 2006 PETITI RESPONDENTS 3. 4. Sharda Dubey, W/o Shantinath Dubey Aged About 45 ysars R/o Viliage Lingiadih Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary' Department of Revenue Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bui.'ding Raipur (C.G.) Collector, Collectorate Bilaspur strict Bilaspur (C.G.) Tahsildar, Biiaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) Municipal Corporation Bilaspur Through The Commissioner, Municipa! Corporation Bilaspur (C.G.) Present: Shri Upendra Bharat, Shri R.D. Rai, Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal & Shri Rajeev Bharat, learned counsel for the petitioner. Shri Utkarsh Verma, iearned Dy. Govt. Adv. for the State (Passed on 5'" May, 2006) The grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is in actual possession and enjoyment of the petition schedule property and the Authorities of the Municipai Corporation, Bilaspur, the fourth respondent herein, without reason or rhyme and without any semblance of legal right over {he petition scheduie land have issued the impugned notice statsng that the petitioner has encroached the petition schedule land and put up construction unauthorisedly and calling upon her to remove the construction v/ithin seven days and if she compiies with the demand, they •-^^...-...._ _. .._...._:_..: Subbu would provide alternative land elsewhere. If the version of the petitioner is correct, the petitioner can have effective and comprehensive legai remedy by way of a suit before the jurisdictional Civil Court. The petitioner can avail of private iaw review remedies like declaration and/or injunction. The dispute brought before the Court relates to title of the petition schedute property. Whether it is the property of the petitioner as claimed by her or it is the property of the Government or Municipai Corporation, that question cannot be decided in a summary proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution. In that view of the matter, 1 decline to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed, however, resen/ing liberty to the petitioner to workout legal remedies before the jurisdictionai Civil Court. No eosts. | Sd/- Chief Justice r