@ IN THE HIGH CQURT OF JUDICATURg CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPU‘R WP N0. 7 9,. g mm [bleloplmit DKS. HIW Raipur -—(C,G.) ' ' WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2261227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ?etitioner Smt. 1w:SmmaW/o Smmdra Surana @d, about 34 years, R/o avil H1165 Rsipur— (CG. ) Vewus Raii’iondents Raipur Dsv$opmmt Authority through its Chief Execwive OfEyer, G.E.R0ad, Raipur —i¥(€fG,) 2. Munidpal Cmporaaion Raipur Wang its Wma, Nhh'iya GV' ,1: Road, Raipur —~ (CG) Smte of» Mam ‘hougi the p R Sam-atmy'Urbm Adminstrmion and 19/4/2002 Shri P. Diwakar for Shri Manindra Shrirastava for respondents no. 1 and 2. Dr.;N.K. Shukla, Addl. Advocate General: yyith Miss Singhai, Dy. Govt. Advocate, for respondent no.3. Heard. Shri Shrivastava submits that respondent No. ~1 is no longer in existence and th‘e assets and liabilities of respondent No. 1 have been transferred to respondent N0. 2 by notification issued by the State Governement. produced the notice and pointed out that the notice for damand ofjustice was $61 17/1/2001M.r Counsel for the petitioner submits that‘respondent .No. 1 had issued letters, ohe su ch letter is dated 3— 1 14200 1 (Annexure A—3), whereby 1 \xland in question comes within Devendra Nagar Yojana and \ rhe petitioner. f Shri Diwakar, learned counsel for the petitioner ved on‘the respondent no. l on mww‘t. ”:2, :. he petitioner was informed that the mmgiwm the respondent No. 1 is ‘11 iterested to solve the dispute through amicable settlem required. The petitioner‘s like annexure A-4 etc. ha‘ yet been taken. the petitioner submits that since Learned counsel for respondent no. 1 is now n| _. the assets and iiability 0i over by the Corporation pursuant to the notification issued by the State, the Corporatio: 1 may create third party interest jeopardizing the rights of the petitioner. the petitioner further submits that Learned counsel for the petitioner had purchz tsed the land through the sale-deed. pondent on the other hand submits t of the sale—deed is to be considered and they are collecting the records. Havingeonsidered 1 x case and the material av; ulable on record, it is directed that " Counsel for the res that the validity and effec u _\ ent, for which certain formalities are ubmits that requisite documents ve been submitted but no action has K5 wk.“ 1erged in Municipal Corporation and respondent no. 1 have. been taken I .he facts and Circumstances of the V‘ ‘ [new x XI—HC—22 WWiifEz’tm gg, *Wanéa the petitioner shall make a detailed representation to the State Government through Secretary within 15 days from today along with all the dbcumentsand copy of this petition Clearly specifying the opeh area still lying, which shall be decided by the State or such other authorit'y as directed by the State Government as early as possible preferably within two months from the date of receipt of the representation. The ,petitioner shall be heard and the State may also hear such other person including department. t Counsel for the peti ioner submits that in the meantime third party interest may 0t be created on the open area. It is directed that no third party interest shall be created on the open area in quest on till the representation is decided by the State/cernpetent hority. If any adverse order is t passed, the petitioner ma challenge the same afresh. ' ections, this petition’is disposed , of. ‘\ Sdl- ’ I Certified photocopy s per rules. i a)? Fakhruddin Judge ’ ,1 With the aforesaid [aw