'^?'""'w-7 :^ 5~i: ^~?,^i(F[:':6 S g;K:i.ll.,± WfcK*-""; <? ^- / zro^. IN THE HON'BLE fflGH COVRT OF JCDICATimE, CnHATTISGARH At BILASPVRfC.G) WRITPETITIONrC) No. 2-^ / 2007 ( Other thaa Service Matter) (Local Body Matter ) PETITIONER ^' ^^ ^^ ^' Q'?-^/ >J>' s.O.. l^* 'y" py' ..•*"• s-"' .^s" ^ RESPOl€>ENTS Tek Chand Agrawal S/oNand Kishore Agrawal. Aged about 73 years, Occupation -Business Man R/o Near Janki Dharmashala Kharsia, DistRAIGARH(C.G.) VERSUS 1. State ofChhattisgarh Through Secretary, Ministiy ofTowa Adininistration and Development Raipur. 2. Director Town Admiiustration and Development Department,Raipur (C.G.) - S.ChiefMunicipal Officer Nagar Palika Parisad Kharsia District Raigarh ( Chhattisgarh ) WRIT PETTTION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF TBE CONSTTTUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRTT IN TH2E NATURE OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHE APPROPRIATE WMTORDERORDIRECTION ETC. ^) HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT Bll-ASPUR SINQLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AQNiHOTRI, J, Pstitfoner ResDondents WRIT PETITION (C.) N0.277 OF 2007 Tek Chand Agrawal versus Stete of Chhattlsgarh and others Present : Mr. Uttam Pandey, counsei for the petitioner. Mr. Utkarsh Verma, Deputy Govemment Adyocate for the State/respondents No.1 and 2. None aopears for respondent No.3. •fh (Passed on 20"' Day of February, 2007) Leamed counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made an apptication to the Chlef Municiiality Officer, Municipal Counci!, Kharsia on 19-1-2007 (P-7). The petitioner, without awalting for reasonabte time, has directty approaehed ttiis Court seekina for a writ. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is unabie to point out as to what is the right and how it is infringed to seek enforcement under Article 226 of t'ne Constitution of india. The learned counsel further submits that ottier persons have been allotted certain shop Jands, but he has not been attotted shop land. This itself does not crsate any right in favour of the petitioner. At the most, the petitioner /2^') may ciaim right of consideration for allotment of shop land. The petitioner has made an application for the same on 19-1-2007 03-7). It tantamounts to abuse and misuse of judscial process that without awaiting for decision of the Municipal Council, the petitioner straightway rushes to the Constitutiona! Court for relief. This petition is not maintainabie on this ground aione. 3. Thus, the wr'rt petition is dismissed summaniy. No order astocosts. '—— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gopa! rf^