HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE GHHAmSOARH : BILASPU8 SINGLE BENCH: HON'BLE SHRI S.R. NAYAK. C.J. WRIT PETITION (Cl N0.5765 OF 2006 PETmONER Vs. RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Jhaman Ram S/o. F^urama, aged about 45 yeare, Caste Nageriya, OccupaUon Wekler, South Eastem Coalfields Ltd., Dipka Project, Korba, R/o. Jaii'amnagar, P.0. Jairamnagar, Tahsil Masturi, distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) State of ChhatBsgarii Through ttie Secretery Revenue Departmert, DKS Bhavan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) Tahsildar, Masturi, Tahsil Ma^uri, Di^trict Bilaspur (C.G.) Revenue Inspector, Masturi, Dirt-id Bilaspur (C.G.) Patwari, F^twari Ctrete No.38, Masturi, Tahsil Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Present: Smt. Hamida Siddique, leamed counsel ft»rttie petittorrer. Shri Sanjay S. Agrawal, leamed G.A. fm the respondents. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 9"' November, 2006) The only complaint in this writ petition is that though the second respondent Tahsildar, Tahsil Masturi, as per the Order dated 18.05^0)6 (Annexure-P/1) directed the respondents 3 and 4 Revenue Inspector Masturi and Patwari, Patwari Circle No.38, Masturi, respecUvely, to remove the obstmctlons raised by a private party on the peUBon schaiule path, Uie direction of the second respondent is not cairied out by the respondents 3 and 4, and therefore, respondents 2 to 4 be directed to comply with the directions of the second respondent. Articte 226 of the Constitution of India is not meantfor enforcing sueh directions issued by the Tahsildar. The Tahsildar having issued such dlrecUen te dufy bound to enforce the same through the subordlnate officials or himself and if he does not respect his own order and do not take apprepriate acUon, it te open for the petitioner to bring it to the n<rtice of the hi^ier-ups of <he Revenue Admini^raUQn and ssek appropriate interventton in ttie matter. Reserving such liberty to the petiUoner, ttie writ peUUon is disndssed. No costs. Sd/- ChiefJustice • ^ \- «.