At the hearing, this Court has called upon the learned counsel for the petitioner to point out the power and authority of respondent No.2 to issue certificate dated 20-11-2010 issued in favour of the petitioner by respondent No.2. The learned counsel is unable is point out any statutory provision under which respondent No.2 is vested with the authority to issue such a certificate. Unless the certificate dated 20-10-2010 which was purported to have been cancelled by subsequent resolution which is impugned in this Writ Petition, posits of legality and legitimacy, its cancellation becomes wholly inconsequential and irrelevant. The facts pleaded in the Writ Petition would obviously reveal that there is a serious dispute between the petitioner on the side and respondent Nos.4 to 6 on the other over the property in respect of which the earlier certificate dated 20-10-2010 was issued and later resolution dated 30-11-2010 was passed by respondent No.2. Such rights of the private parties need to be adjudicated through a competent court of civil jurisdiction. Respondent No.2 is not vested with any power to interfere with such civil disputes and issue certificates such as those which are subject matter of the present Writ Petition.
