R IS, SP WRIT PETITION (C I No.176l2011 PETITIONER Ramjanam son of latg Sukhan Ram, aged about 38 years, R/o Sendur Road, Balrampur, Tahsil Balrampur, District Surguja (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS 1 State ofChhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of D.K$.Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Collector Surguja (C.G.) Tahsiidar, Balrampur, Tahsii omce, Balrampur, District Surguja (C.G.) Revenue, Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Corporation Bairampur, District Surguia (C.G.) incharge of Police Station, Balraipur, District Surguja (C.G.) - M t L. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2261227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ppearance : Mr. Viplaw Shrivastava, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer for ‘ th State/respondents 1 to 3 on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (13.01.2011) SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Heard on admission. The petitioner has filed this writ petition chalenging the validity of the memo dated 28.12.2010 ‘(Annexure P11) issued by the Tehsildar, Balrampur, District Surguja (C.G.). By the impugned memo, the Tehsildar has written to the Chief Municipal Officer, Station House Officer and Revenue inspector to remain \s\gresent on 18.01.2011 near Janpad Panohayat \ HIGH COUT OF CHHATTGARH BILAUR ‘ A e l , \ \ WRIT PETITION (C I No.176l2011 Balrampur along with equipments and force for the purpose of removal of illegal encroachment. far as the petitioner is concemed, he is not an encroacher and he is Patta hoider of the land on which his house is situated. However, a proceeding under Section 248 of C.G. Land Revenue Code was drawn against the petitioner and ultimately, an order of removai of encroachment has been passed against him. His submission is that the, petitioner apprehends that his house would also be demolished in the proposed action to be taken on 18.01.201 1. ' it is worth mentioning that there is nothin specific in the impugned memo dated 28.12.2010. Even it does not refer to the case of the petitioner. The Tehsildar h alrey passe r ai h titioer nder Section 48 the C.. Lan evenue Code 16.1. u itot gating he si orde before Appeliat thtie h pon ailed this petitio or ut o th em ae n f qashmen f e mo dtd 28 1 0 (nexe Pl. .1 2.20 Anur 1) nideing the abe facts a ciustns Cosr ov nd rcmace of he case o e t pprpt o dmi thi t , I d not dem i aoriae t at s etitio for hmt t em dte pn hearing for quasen of he mo ad 28.1 .201 nx 1 . Th pen hefore, is dsd smarily. e titio, ter ismise um Howev, th eitne o t ir c he pea uhi n .12.201 uuen re ifical gaist he pe et : i enroen ade b m. Certited p pe . Sd/— i sunii Kumar Sinha ’ \ Judge g as ad d an oder agnst te pen u 2'of G d R on 22010,; bteven whu ait t ad r the e Auoris, te etitier hsf 2 0 (Aneure Pl ) er e ptior wuld be a lbety to approah t Apiite Atorites agitatig the order dated 160 or any sbseqt odr specly passed an t titioner rlaing to the aieged cachmt m y hi i coy as r rules \4‘ shyna 2 ,i