Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Sudama Prasad Shukla vs State Of Chhattisgarh 3 Cra/831/1999 ... on 10 January, 2020

Author: P. Sam Koshy

Bench: P. Sam Koshy

                                                                                            NAFR
                           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
                                   WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 87 OF 2020
           •      Sudama Prasad Shukla, S/o Shri Sharda Prasad Shukla, aged about 71
           years, R/o Green Park Colony, Jarhabhata, Bilaspur, Tahsil & District Bilaspur
           (CG)
                                                                           ... Petitioner
                                               versus
           1.     State of Chhattisgarh, through Collector, District Bilaspur (CG)
           2.     Additional Tehsildar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)
           3.     Station House Officer, P.S. Koni, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG)
           4.     Maal-Jamadar, Tehsil Office, Bilaspur (CG)
                                                                               ... Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondents : Mr. V.R. Tiwari, Addl. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10/01/2020

1. The relief sought for by the petitioner in the present writ petition is for issuance of a direction to the respondents to comply with the order dated 18.2.2019 passed by respondent no.2 - Additional Tehsildar, Bilaspur.

2. At the outset, this Court is of the opinion that the writ petition would not be maintainable. Firstly, the persons who are said to have been encroaching upon the government land and erecting constructions are not party to the present writ petition. Secondly, the writ court cannot be converted into a court of execution for an order passed by the Additional Tehsildar. If at all, if there is an order passed by the Additional Tehsildar which has not been complied with, the petitioner would be at liberty to approach the higher authorities in the revenue department as also other forums for redressal of his grievances.

3. With the aforesaid liberty in favour of the petitioner, the writ petition is dismissed as not maintainable.

Sd/-

                                                                           (P. Sam Koshy)
/sharad/                                                                       JUDGE