cl HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(Cl No. 3871 OF 2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS Smt. Chunmuni Bhagat, W/o Shri Dhaniya Ram, aged about 40 years, R/o Village Panchayat Hetghencha, Tahsil Farsabahar, District Jashpur (C.G.). State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Panchayat, D.S.K. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.). The Collector, Jashpur, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh). Sub-Divisional Officer (Rev) Kunkuri, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.).' The Tahsildar, Farsabahara, District Jashpur (C.G.). Om Narayan Singh (Up-Sarpanch) S/o Chaman, aged about 40 years, Caste Rautiya, Sangeeta, W/o Shri Sandip, aged about 30 years, Caste Uraon, Sanjay Nikunj, S/o Chitthuram, aged about 35 years, Caste Uraon, Dewari, W/o Ramkishun, aged about 40 years, Caste Uraon, Bhanumati, W/o Dhanurjay, aged about 42 years, Caste Mahkul, Sewavati Bai, D/o Jaiprakash, aged about 30 years, Caste Dom, Kunti, W/o Prem Prakash, aged about 35 years, Caste Rawat, Raghunath, S/o Dhaneshwar, aged about 42 years, Caste Mahkul, Kaushilya, W/o Hatkeshwar, aged about 37 years, Caste Mahkul, Saniyaro, W/o Rameshwar, aged about 44 years, Caste Rautiya, Ravindra, S/o Kapil, aged about 37 years, Caste Rautiya, Respondents no. 5 to 15 are Resident of Village Hetghencha, Janpad Panchyat Farsabahar, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. (SB :Hon'ble Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:- Shri Parasmani Shriwas, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, G.A, for the State. 7. 8. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. ORAL- ORDER (Passedon 20/07/2011) 2-- ^ ^^^^^ 1. By this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India petitioner has challenged the legality and propriety of the order dated 27/6/2011 passed by Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)/Competent Authority under (Panchayat) Kunkuri District Jashpur (C.G.) in case No. 02/A-89 (6)/10-11. 2. Shri Parasmani Shriwas learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Sushil Dubey learned G.A. for the State are heard. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner frankly admits that order impugned is ,.. appealable and alternate remedy is available. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that he seeks to withdraw ^this petition with liberty to avail alternate remedy available under the law. 5. Prayer allowed. 1 6. Consequently, petition is dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. 7. All interim applications are also dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge