HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR W.P.(C)No.1576of2010 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS hNuiiiiii^ Chouwaram Tandon, S/o Sukhram, aged about 57 years, R/o Rajhara Fire Bridget Dalli Rajhara, Durg, District Durg (C.G.) Permanent Address-Village Koliyapuri, P.H. No.20, District Durg, Chhattisgarh Versus 1 The Grih Nirman Mandal, through Executive Engineer, Chhattisgarh Housing Board, Division Durg, Padnabhpur, Durg Chhattisgarh 2 Additional Tahsildar, Rajhara, Chhattisgarh Dalli 3 Secretary Village Panchayat Koliyapuri, Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 Durgesh Kumar, S/o Not known, R/o House No.1, Jawahar Nagar, Durg, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Appearance: Mr.T.K. Tiwari, Counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Smita Ghai, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No.2 on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (12.04.2010) SUNILKUMARSINHA.J. Heard on admission. This petitioner is aggrieved by the communication dated 05.03.2010 issued by the authority of respondent No.1, whereby, it has been alleged that the petitioner is W.P.(C)No.1576of2010 raising illegal construction on theland in between House No.1 and House No.94 in the area of Khasra No.245/1, which was the land of Deen Dayal Housing Colony, Kolihapuri, District Durg. By the said communication, the petitioner has been directed to remove the illegal construction, failing which, the authority has proposed for taking steps to initiate criminal action. Mr. T.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that relying on the complaint-Annexure P/3, the aforesaid communication has been issued by the authority of respondent No.1. He submits that the petitioner is a Patta hoider and he has a Patta of Khasra No.245/04, area 33 x 33 sq. ft. and whatever construction raised is on this land alone. Since there appears to be a dispute with regard to identity and physical situation of two Khasra Numbers i.e. Khasra No.245/01 and 245/04, the matter would require leading of evidence of parties to establish their respective claims which course is not permissible in a writ petition. In view of the above, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition for further hearing. The petition stands disposed of. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to put his claim before the appropriate authority of respondent No.1 showing that he is in possession of his own piot bearing Khasra No.245/4 area 33 x 33 sq. ft. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge shyna