P-1) was issued. Learned State counsel submits that a perusal of Line Plan (Annexure R-1/6) would show that there is encroachment on government land by respondent No.7. He further submits that eariier respondent No.7 had approached the Civil Court, Dhamtari by filing a civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction and the suit was dismissed vide order dated 03-11-2007 (Annexure R-1/3) holding that the suit was not maintainabte and barred, and thereafter, fresh notice was issued to the respondent No.7 and now the petitioners, who are tenants, have filed this writ petition seeking to espouse the cause of the owner of the premises. It is nextsubmitted that on 20-02-2009, the President ofthe Municipal Council admittedly sent a letter to respondent No.2 for removal of encroachment on National Highway No.43. The Chief Municipat OfRcer, Municipal Council, Dhamtari also sent a letter dated 20-04-2009 (Annexure R-1/5) stating that the construction of building is in violation of terms and conditions of sanction. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 5/State submits that from the aforesaid details and the map placed on record, it is ctear that the building of Arya Samaj of which the petitioners are tenants, have clearly encroached upon the land forming part of National Highways. He further submits that there is no illegality in the action of the respondents No.1 to 5 in initiating proceedings.
