High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPPIL/24/2021dismissed

Muslim Jamat Committee v. The Chhattisgarh Wakf Board

2021-08-25Hon'Ble The Acting Chief Justice,Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey2 pages

WPPIL No. 24 of 2021 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPPIL No. 24 of 2021 • Muslim Jamat Committee Through Its Secretary Shri Mo. Rashid Khan S/o Late Mo. Wahid Khan, Aged About 51 Years, R/o Ward No.-5 Nagar Panchayat Sargaon, Tah- Pathriya And DistrictMungeli, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. The Chhattisgarh Wakf Board Through- Its Chief Executive OfÏcer Devendra Nagar Raipur District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Sub Divisional OfÏcer Patharia, District-Mungeli Chhattisgarh

3. The Tahsildar Patharia, District-Mungeli Chhattisgarh

4. Narendra Gupta S/o Surajmal Gupta

5. Piyush Gupta S/o Surajmal Gupta Respondent No. 4 & 5 both ofÏce address are Shri Book Dipo Bilaspur, Near Old High Court, District-Bilaspur ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondent/State Mr. VR Tiwari, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Sudeep Agarwal, Dy. AG Proceedings through Video Conferencing DB.: Hon'ble Mr. Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. C.J & Hon'ble Mrs. Rajani Dubey, J.

Order on Board by Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. C.J.

WPPIL No. 24 of 2021 25/8/2021

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner has filed this PIL seeking a direction to respondents 2 & 3 i.e. the Sub Divisional OfÏcer, Patharia, District Mungeli (CG) and the Tahsildar, Patharia, District Mungeli (CG) to remove the names of respondents 4 & 5 namely Narendra Gupta and Piyush Gupta from the revenue records and further direct respondent No.1 the Chhattisgarh Wakf Board to take necessary action against respondents 4 & 5.

3. The issue brought before this Court pertains to ownership and possession of some land, on which, respondents 4 & 5 are allegedly in possession.

4. The PIL Court cannot decide dispute between individuals in respect of possession over the land. Whether or not respondents 4 & 5 own the land or they have encroached the land can be decided by the jurisdictional Civil Court or any other statutory body in accordance with law.

5. The PIL is not maintainable. It is accordingly dismissed, as not maintainable.

Sd/- Sd/- ( Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Rajani Dubey) Acting Chief Justice Judge Shyna