C^^)2^ BEFQRE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^- "2-Dlf^ WRIT PETITION (C) N0. t|AS^'^2016- ~3f PETITIONERS : Y^ Bisahu Ram Rathiya, S/o Bhukha Ram Rathiya, aged about 48 years; 2. ' Laxmin bai, D/o Daulat Ram Rathiya, aged about 27 years; 3." Bholanath Rathiya, S/o Ghatur Singh Rathiya, aged about 24years; 4.' Vidyadhar Patel, S/o Kedar Nath patel, Caste- Aghariya, aged about 40 years; Prahlad Yadav, S//o Thukuram Yadav, aged about 38 years; 6. Yadram. Yadav, S/o Samaru Yadav, aged about 37 years; 7.' Champa Bai, W/o Vidyadhar Patel, aged about 32 years; ^^ -A^. 7?) ^. .rs te-;^T^ <3^/ Q-/« I Al, ^ -^ ^" A ^ ^f RESPONDENTS 5. <' 8. ^ Dataram Yadav,; S/o Chainra Yadav, aged about 48 years; 9."" Bikauram Yadav, S/o Balthu Ram Yadav, aged about 48 years; 10^ Jagat Ram, S/o Samaru Yadav, aged about 60 years; ll.' Fanas Ram Rathiya, S/o Dular Singh, aged about 45 years, ^ ' ' . ' 12. Budhram Rathiya, S/o Dubraj Rathiya, aged about 60 years; All are R/o vill^ge- Badadarha (Rampur), P.O.-Kevli, Tehsil-Dabhra, District- Jaajgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS 1) State of Chhattisgarh, Through The Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2) Collector, District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) Q^ 3) 4) 5) <-" The Sub-Divisional OffiGer, Tehsil- Dabhra, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) The Tehsildar, Dabhra, District- Janjgir- Champa(C.G.) ,, M/s. D.B. Power Limited, Through The Project Incharge, village- Badadarha (Rampur), P.O.-Kevli, Tehsil-Dabhra, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA !-w HIGH_COURT_OF (;HHATTLSGARH_: BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (0 N0.4685 OF 2011 PETITIONERS Bisahu Ram Rathiya & others Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Ashish Surana, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State. ORDER(QRAL1 (Passed on this 16th day ofAugust, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners impugn the notice dated 23-7-2011 (Annexure - P/1) issued by the Tahsildar, Dabra. ^ 3. According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in Fanas Ram Rathiya & Others v. UnJon ofVndia & Others , this Court has specifically directed the Collector, Janjgir-Champa to look into the grievances of the petitioners. Thus, no officer subordinate to him can act on behalf of the Collector and particularly when the order of this Court does not provide that Collector or any other Revenue Officer. 4. The contention of the learned counsel appearing forthe petitioners appears to be proper and merits acceptances. Since it is made clear that the Collector shall look into the grievance of the petitioners, 1 do not think that how the Collector can take recourse to the provisions of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code whereunder some other officer is also empowered to look into gnevance. 5. I am sure that the Collector understands the importance and effect ofjudicial order. Thus, it is expected that the order passed by this Court in Fanas Ram Rathiya (supra) shall be complied with in its letter andspirit. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ' WP (C) No.6421 of 2010 (decided on 29-6-2011) f."