^P/2^_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (Cl No. \\^ of 2008 PETITIONER: ^ Fakhruddin Son of Late Shri Shamsuddin, aged about 65 years, ..^ Resident of Near ^ys Stand, P.B " K'')^^^^^^^- ^nnrlQrr^i Tah^l<l^rc^£l^+ ^&d--" (^onc/ercie ......••-"'^" Gunderdehi, Tahsil-Bwg, District Durg (Chhattisgarh). Versus RESPONDENTS ^-^y/ SSfy ^ /1. State of Chhattisgarh , through Secretary, Department of Urban ^ Administration and Development, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur ^ ^j' ^ (Chhattisgarh). "•.^J^ y ^>^ 2. Nagar Panchayat, Gunderdehi, through its Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Gunderdehi, Tahsil Gunderdehi, District Durg (Chhattisgarh). y- WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT/WRITS. DIRECTIONS ETC. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETmON fC) No. 1157 of2008 PETITIONER : Fakhiiiddin. VERSU8 • . . , RESPONDENT8 : State ofChhattisgarh & Anotiier. WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shii Satisii K. A^iuhQtn, J. Present: Shi'i Sanjay K. Agrawal with Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Advocates for the petitioiier. Slu-i M.P.S.Bhatia, Dy. G.A. fortlie State/respondent No. 1. SM Prateek Shamia, Advocate forthe respondent No. 2. ORDERff^AL) (Passed on 29 day of October, 2010) 1. The petitioner seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus restraming the respondent No. 2 from evicting the petitioner and demolishmg the petitiongr's shop, situated at withm the limits of Nagar Paiichayat, Gunderdehi. 2, Leamed counsel appearing for the respondent No, 2-Nagar Panchayat, Gunderdehi, submits that 210 cause oftaction has arisen in the instant petition as there is 210 move on the part of the respondent-Nagar Panchayat, to demolish the propeily in dispute. The petition has been filed on the basis of mere apprehension that his property may be demolished. He further submits that if any \ action is proposed to be taken against the petitioner in fliture, the same shall b@ done in accordance with law. 3. In view of foregoing, according to leamed counsel for the petitioner, nothing sui^ives for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. | Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge Ainit