C ^f^^ BEFORE THE HON^BLE^HJGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR fe) SG g>^~/0 7 WRIT PETITION"NO. OF 200*7 .,^" \&J .^y^ >.^<).//<^/ PETITIONER_^,.--'^-"' ...•-fem Chand Soni S/o Late Shri Mahngu ^.', ..•('f yt\y SSLO, aged about 59 years, R/0 Namankala Patpariya near Punjab Garden M.G Road .-*'" :''! ..••"' . - .- y ^' .-•"''' Ambikapur, Sarguja (C.G.) VERSUS RESPODENTS ^-1 State of Chhattisgarh through Department of Revenue through Secretary ^.0 Revenue D.K.S Bhawan Raipur (C.G) ^ he Collector Sarguja Ambikapur (C.G) -:3"' '.4°/ -;>'' '^ , o'^p 0>' ^' ^... Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission through District Project Co-ordinator Ambikapur Sarguja (C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOF INDIA •^ HIOH COTJRT OF CHHATTT8GARH AT BITASPIJR PETmONER WRTT PETmON (0 No. 3085 of2007 Prem Chand Soni. RE.SPONDENTS VRRSIJS State ofChhattisearh & Others. WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Ajmihotri, J. Present: Dr. N.K.Shukla, Senior Advocate with Shri Shailendra Shukla, Advouals fur the pelitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govemment Advocate for the State/respondent No. 1 aiid 2. Shri A.S.Kochhwaha, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. OR D E R (Passed on 26°day ofSeptember, 201 1) 1. At fhe very outset, Shri Kachhwaha, leamed coiMisel appearing for the resoondent No. 3 submits fliat fhe respondent No. 3 has been a&siaiedthejob ofcoastniction ofbuilding oathe land in (piestion. Qn mstmctious, Shri Kachhwaha submits ttaat let the matter be referred to the Collector, SurgiHa, Ambikapur to decidestatus of the land ia dispute after affordine proper opportitnitv ofhearine to Ihe parties coneemed. 2. Shri Sao, leamed Govemment Advocate appearine for the State/ respondent No. 1 and 2 conciire wifli the submission made by Shri Kaehhwaha. He fi-irther submite that the CoUector would tak® decisioa after hearing the parties concemed OB the issue, as stated above, a.s eariy as possible, preferabty within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copv ofthis order. In the meantime, the petitioner would not be dispossessed from the land ia dispute. In view of the above, accordms to leamed counsel for the petitioner, nothine survives for adjudtcation at this staae. Accordinelv, the vwit petition is disposed'of. No orda- asto costs. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 3. 4. 5. Amit