i, f •§. •t VSV' • S J. -&i»3'%KK^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Writ Petition (Art. 2271 No.2977 of 2011 ej- PETITIONERS/: (Applicants) RESPONDENTS/: (Non-applicants) 1. Ramanuj Sharma, S/o late Gajanand Sharma, R/o Sikolabasti Durg, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) 2. Ramesh Kumar Sharma (since dead died on 03.04.2011) through legal heirs :- 2-(A). Smt. Shai-da Sharma, W/o late Shri Ramesh Kumar Sharma (B). Sundeep Sharma, S/o late Shri Ramesh Kumar Sharma (C). Sanjay Sharma, S/o late Shri Ramesh Kumar Sharma 2-A to C are R/o Balko, Korba, Tahsil and District Korba (C.G.) 3. Kamlesh Kumar Sharma, S/o late Gajanand Sharma, R/o Balko, Korba, Tahsil and District Kbrba (C.G.) 4. Naresh Kumar Sharma, S/o late Gajanand Sharma, R/o Sikolabasti Durg, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) 5. Bhupendra Kumar Sharma, S/o late Gajanand Sharma R/o Balko, Korba, Tahsil and District Korba (C.G.) 6. Smt. Dayawati W/o late Gajanand Sharma 7. Smt. Kaushilya Bai, W/o late Ramnihal Sharma 8. Sitendra Kumar Sharma, S/o late Ramnihal Sharma 9. Smt. Chetna, D/o late Ramnihal Sharma 10. Smt. Minita, D/o late Ramnihal Sharma 11. Smt. Shweta, D/o late Ramnihal Sharma Petitioner No.6 to 11 all R/o Sikolabasti Durg, Tahsil and District Durg (C.G.) Petitioner No.2 to 11 through Ramanuj Sharma, late Gajanand Sharma, R/o Sikolabasti Durg, Tahsil and District Durg Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh through Collector Durg, District Durg (C.G.) Soma 2. a Additional Collector and Competent Authority Urban Land Ceiling, Durg (C.G.) {Writ petition underArticle 227 ofthe Constitution of India} Present: Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sareena Khan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Sushil Dubey, Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents. Sinale Bench: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma. J ORAL ORDER (21-7-2011) 1. By this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of tndia, the petitioners have challenged legality and propriety ofthe order dated 28-3-2011 passed by the competent authority in Case No.229/A-90/Sa(1) year 1977-78, whereby the competent authority has dismissed the application filed on behalf of the petitioners herein on the ground that possession of land under the provisions of Section 10 (3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'the Act') has already been taken over on 25-3-1988. 2. After arguing for some time, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the order passed by the competent authority is appealable in terms of Section 33 of the Act and, therefore, the petitioners are having exhaustive remedy. Learned Senior Advocate seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to approach the appellate forum. 3. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. No order as to costs. Certified copy of the order impugned be returned to counsel for the petitioners on his submitting the duly attested Photostat copy of the same. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ^