(g? BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATI'ISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETIT10N(227)N0 7z1% /201o MW g9 3EM§H M” PETITIONER James Kujur aged about 57 years son of Shrl Junas KuJur R/o VIH Uppar Kachhar Ihé Farsabahar Dlstt Jashpur(CG) VERSUS y RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary Department of Panchayat and Social Welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2./ Collector, Distt. Jashpur (c.G.) 3/ Sub Divisional Officer (Rev.), Kunkuri Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 4. " Tahsudar, Tah. — Farsabahar, Jashpur (CG) 5. / Up - Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat - Upar Kachhar, Vikas Khand — Farsabahar, Distt. / W Jashpur (CG) 6. Rojgar Sahayak, Gram Panchayat — Upar Kachhar, Vikas Khand — Farsabahar, Distt. Jashpur (CG) WRIT PETITION UIA 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA / \x HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench: Hon’ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mi —————————————————————————.——————.————————————.————.————.———— ' u. Writ Petition (227) No.7228 of 2010 James Kujur Petitioner VerSUS Resgondents State of Chhattisgarh and others Present: Shri Arun Shukla, counsel for the petitioner. Shri R.R.Sinha, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents No.1 to 4. . Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India ORAL ORDER K (Passed on 13““ December, 2010) Heard on admission. 2. Leamed counsel for the petitioner would argue that the revenue authorities should have granted the application restraining I the Panchayat to raise construction of the Gram Panchayat building on the subject land. 3. On perusal of the orders passed by the revenue authorities Annexures P-1,‘ P-2 a/nd P3it would appear that the subject construction of Gram Panchayat building is raised on a piece of Government land. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said construction on the ground that the construction is made on the land which is reserved for playground and the land is involved in ceiling proceedings. shra 0% 2 4. The Tahsildar, the Sub—Divisional Officer (Revenue) and the Collector have concurrently found that the application filed by the petitioner is frivolous and no such case for staying the construction of Gram Panchayat Bhawan is made out. The authorities have dealt with the facts of the case in detail and have passed reasoned orders. 5. Admittedly, the petitioner is not claiming any relief for himself. Thus, the question as to whether the construction is made on a particular piece of Government land which is reserved for playground or otherwise is essentially an administrative decision, which need not be interfered in proceedings under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner has failed to point out any inherent defect in the orders passed by the subordinate revenue authorities to demonstrate that the authorities have acted beyond jurisdiction or that the orders suffer with any perversity. 6. No case for interference in exercise of power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is made out. The writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge /. ,, r/ Sdl— Gopal