^^ ^^^} SENCN IN THE HON'BLE COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ,P. (Cl No. : /2010 PETITIONERS 1'')^ .**' // .**' }/OW-f'.-- /xJ^0--'" /•/\ "'..•••'•' ^••^,w-'"" <*?\'°.--•' '^"'J"'"-" ..-:"" • ^^'y/--"" '^'°^--"' ^0' RESPONDENTS 1 Kailash Agrawal S/o. late Shri Ramniwas Agrawal, aged about 50 years, 2. Smt. Dropati, Wd/o. late Shri Ramniw^.8 Agrawal, aged abouf7uyears, /* Both R/o. Jagatput, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS : . 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. State of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, Department of Revenue, DKS Bhawan, Manatralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Collector Raigarh Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) Superintending Engineer, PubUc Works Department, Raigarh (C.G.) •» Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Raigarh (C.G.) Ramky Infrastructure Limited,having its local office at :Near Saheb Ram. Nagar,T.V.TowerRoad, Rgdgarh, District Raigarh (C.G) >' > WIUT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA mpH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITION (Q No. 5483 of 2010 PETtTIONER : Kailash Agrawal & Others. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : StateofChhattisgarh&Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTrTUTIQNQF INDIA SB: Honlble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri,J. Present: Shri Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G.A. for the State/respondents lto4. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on 24U day of September, 2010) 1. Case ofthe petitioner is that the land ofthe petitioner is adjacent to the govemment land, whereupon construction of Medical College is being carried out by the respondent No. 5, the contractor. He is duiiiping the rubble/waste materials of excavation on the land of the petitioner. It has been made clear even in the report dated 21.04.2010 (Annexure P/6) ofthe Revenue Inspector, Raigarh (1), to the Tahsildar, Raigarh. The petitioner requested the Collector to look into his grievances. Despite that, nothing has happened till date and the petitioner is suffering on account the act of the respondent No. 5, on behalf of the Public Works Department, Raigarh. 2. Shri Bhatia, leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondent No. 1 to 4 submits that since an application/representation has been made to the Collector, the Collector may be directed to look into the grievances of the petitioner and appropriate action msy be taken thereafter. 3. In view ofthe above, the Collector, Raigarh is directed to look into the representation of the petitioner dated 12.08.2010 (Annexure P/7) and take appropriate action in accordance wifh law at the eariiest, preferably within a period of four weeks. The petitioner is also at liberty to make a fresh representation to the respondent authorities, ifso advised. 4. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge