High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/3766/2019disposed off

Yudhisthir Bhakt v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2019-10-21Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No.

Yudhisthir Bhakt S/o Late Haripat Bhakt Aged About 48 Years R/o Ward No. 1, Dharamjaigarh Colony, Police Station And Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. The Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.

3. Chief Municipal Officer Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

4. Smt. Yashoda Mandal W/o Late Uttam Mandal Aged About 40 Years R/o Daksha Road, Post Kankhal, Police Station Kankhal, Tahsil And District Haridwar, Uttrakhand.

----Non-applicant For Petitioner :

Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate For State :

Ms. Ishwari Ghritlahare, P.L.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 21/10/2019

1. The limited grievance that the petitioner has in the present writ petition is in respect of the alleged illegal encroachment that is being made by the respondent No.4 over a land, which allegedly is allotted to the petitioner and for which the petitioner is also regularly paying the tax to the Municipal Council, Dharamjaigarh.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that he is in possession of the land from last more than 2-3 decades and suddenly now the respondent No.4 is interfering with the peaceful possession of the petitioner. He further submits that he has already made an objection in this regard to the respondents No.2 & 3, but till date no concrete decision has been taken by them.

3. Given the limited grievance that the petitioner has and the limited relief that he seeks for the respondents No. 2 & 3 to take a decision on his representation, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the respondents No.2 & 3 to look into the grievance of the petitioner and take an appropriate decision on the petitioner's representation in accordance with law.

4. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The authorities are expected to decide the claim of the petitioner purely in accordance with the provisions of law governing the field.

5. With the aforesaid observations, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Ved