PETlTiONERS we 1. Santosh Kumar Gupta, Slo Late Hiralal Gupta, aged about 45 years. Jeet Singh Sardar, S/o Late Narayan Singh, aged about 60 years. Sujaan Singh Sardar, Slo Late Diiip Singh. aged about 65 years. Lakhan Lal Tamrakar, S/o Late Kanhaiyalat Tamrakar, aged abaut 64 years. Kishan $hah, Slo Shri Lakshan Shah, aged abaut 45 years. Hemm} $en, Sio $hri Chiiamani Sen, aged abeut 38 years. Neelkanth Kaushik, $io Shri Sahasram Kaushi, aged about 43 years. Smt. Manjit Kaur, widow of Late Gurucharan Singh, aged about 44 years. Manjit Singh Kohli, S/o Gurubachan Singh Kami, aged about 40 years. AH residents of Bus Stand Road, Manendragarh. District Keria (CG). Versus 1. RESPONDENTS State of Chhattiagarh Through: Secreiary, Department of Revenue, Mantraiaya, D.K.S. Building, Raipur Chhattisgarh. Coiieo‘lor, Koria, Dismct Koria, Baikunthpur, Chhattisgarh. Municipal Council Manendragarh, Through Chief Municipal Qfficer, Municipal Council, Manendragarh, District Koria Chhattisgarh. Bhupendra Club, Manendragarh,‘ Through: its President Shri Ramanuj Agrawai Manendragarh, District : Koria Chhattisgarh. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Petition No. 1850 of 2004 \ (a? (Writ petition under Article 2261227 of the Constitution of india) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate with Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri A.K. Yadav, counsel for the respondent No.3. ORAL RD R (Passed on this 29 day of April, 2mm 1. Leaned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that without issuing any notice, the respondent Nor 3 has started encroaching upon the petition scheduled land owned by the petitioners. Learned counsel further submits that the State has initiated action against the respondent No. 3 as well as the petitioners. 2. Be that as it may, this petition involves question of title and ownership of the land in dispute which cannot be decided by this Court and it requires examination of documents and evidences. Thus, this petition is not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioners to take recourse to competent jurisdictional civil court, for appropriate relief, if so advised. 3. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed with the above stated liberty. r4. Consequently, interim relief granted on 29.7.2004, stands vacated. Gowri sw- Saash 1c Agnilw‘f‘ Judge / .