t- s'\e<3 ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fC.G.t WRIT PETITION N0. /-^S ^"72006 PETITIQNER / ^"M ...' ....•-"...^o'b--" -•••" '^.J RESPONDENTS : ^'1 // cv Vijay Kant Singh Son of Late Shri Ramjanam Singh, aged about 72 years, Occupation Agriculturist, Resident of Kedarpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). VERSUS The District Co-operative Land Development Bank, Through: Its General Manager, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). The Co-operative Land Development Bank, Through: Its Branch Manager, Rajpur, District Surguja (C.G.). /3. The Assistant Registrar, Co- operative Societies, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). / 4. The Joint Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Raipur (C.G.). / 5. The Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). ^•' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI. MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION AND/OR A SUITABLE DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER XI-HC-78 ^PKfl ywi»«i«in«, UTfl'M<|<i, Rldl'tfy _Al-i/3No. i2-14-/2^6 3II^STqaqi (^fgSR;) ^200 an^CTwR'fi* awan^igBiw 4" ^ ' n o S'WIIIR'tlKdOII^SI 09.03.2006 Shri V.K. Ftoidey, couns^l for fhe petitioner. Shri Ufkarsh Verma, DJ IIKlIcKlll llinV't" fttfl *(Rl'(^l'< ^•aKlt•»Aw . Govt. Advocate for the State on advance copy, Heard on adaussion. I This is a petition ffle<|L under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India agaia^ mortgage property by ZUa Sl^ahkan Krishi Aur Giamiu Vikas Baak Maryadit, Ambikapur. Leamed counsel for the 02.07.1998. Against this ord^ .t the notice of auction of the petitioner subiaits that soine loan was taken by the petitioner ^nd on account of repayment fhe dispute was ffled by him. beforj; fhe Asstt. Registrar vide case No. 13/96-97 aad iu fhe Said 41SPUte aa order was passed oa r respoudent had ffled aa appeal before the Joint Registrarvide|appeal No. 49/98 and fhe counter appeal was filed by the petitf.oaer. The sacue were decided on 22.5.2003. Thereafter the pe^itioner has filed the writ petition before this Court vide W.P. N<j notice has been issucd in tbis that without waitiag for dejsision of writ petition, now fhe authonty has started the pr . 2292/2003. He subinits fhatthe petition. His further subinission is icess of auction which is not ia accordauce With law. In view of ttus fact, th|tt W.P. No. 2292/2003 is already pendiag before this Court aijid fh.e petitioner has a liberty to inove aa iaterica appUcation f(|>r graat of appropriate relief in the XI-HC-78 ywq '«i<tinq,y^'H<|<i, ftril'H^ „-^l^;M?l.'.l2r.3± *iiHrtis?*rw Wt200 3n^<r(R^(<pfgET5) an^srwR-ii* gaiTan^CTtp^iqi e'KiigRtilio 3ni<I ^ 'nqfCT'll'i iwmfif fatfl <(R|'(^H ^•iiKltaii^n ^jli.^ said petition pertamiag to ISST] not incliaed to entertam th 1234/20)6 because the pursuaace pf fhe earlier order separa.te case of auction. The petition has no dismissed. However, a liberty appropriate application in 2292/2003) for the approp^ uiterim. relief(s) as clauaed ia 1 issTlauce of notice against him, I am subsequent writ petition No. of notice for auGtioa in yhich is under chaUenge, is not a issliauce ni^rits aad the saxae is suininarily ^s grauted to tihe petitioner to file |fhe pending case (W.P. No. relief iacluding mam a&d pprop-^iate qie present writ petition. rL So7- Sunii Kumar Sinha Judge