v!y •t 3 ^ ;;•'.-! U 'i<rf i'u--' ii.tf ^ Cl l£;l1 \6«.' > IN THE HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) W.P. N0. S^'^& /2006 PETITIONER \o^ ...- ^v.^.. ^' c^: £7 ^...•-•' ^- RESPONDENTS c^ ^" Parmanand Gada^ Aged about 34 years S/o. Shri Roop Sai, R/o. Bilaigarh, Tahsil Saraipali ^•District - Mahasamund (C.G.) f'i^&^ill i^c'^sy'c4- isyi tA?S\ '^aton --^-"" ,. ,;•";', ^' '^SSSyy'^ VERSUS :1. The State of Chhattisgarh^ Through: Secretary Department of Revenue D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur (C.G.) Board of Revenue,/ Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Through: Its Presiding Officer Circuit Court, Raipur District -Raipur (C.G.) 3. Sub-Divisional Officer/- Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. Mohan Lal, S/o. Setram'" 5. Johan Lal, S/o. Setram- 6. Madhavdas, S/o. Setram, Respondent No. 4 to 6 all caste- Gond, resident of village pilaigarh, P.C. N0.11, R.I. Circle & Tahsil Saraipall, District Mahasamund (C.G.) "n "•^^S^^jil^if^S 7. The Naib Tahsildar'/ Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 8. The Collector/ Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER W.P. No.5848/2006 Parmanand Gada Versus RESPONDENTS The State of Chhattisgarh and others SB:- HON'BLE SHRI N.K. AGARWAL, J PRESENT:- Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate, for the petitioner. Shri Vinod Tekam, Panel Lawyer, for respondents No. 1, 3, 7 and 8. Shri Parag Kotecha, Adv., for the respondents No. 4 to 6. ORAL ORDER (23-3-2011) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in compliance of the order passed by the Board of Revenue dated 10-5-2005 (Annexure P-1) thf matter was heard by the Sub Divisional Officer and vide its order dated 26-8- 2006 (Annexure P-2) leamed Sub Divisional Officer has decided the matter against the petitioner. Thereagainst earlier vide Annexure P-3, the petitioner had preferred an appeal before the Additional Collector but due to pendency of instant petition, Che petitioner has withdrawn the appeal. Therefore, he seeks to withdraw this petition with liberty to file application for restoration of the said appeal. 2. Prayer as prayed for is granted. 3. The petition is dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. It is expected that leamed Additional Collector shall decide the application for restoration by taking a liberal view. Sd/- N.K. Agarwal Judge WIO^ -^ 11