- (1.) NASEEMUDDIN, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and for respon dents 3 and 4 and respondents 3 and 4 are also present in person.
(2.) OPPOSITE parties 3 and 4 were directed on 5-8-99 to produce the alleged detenu Baba Kishan Das in Court and in case the alleged detenu was not produced then opposite parties were directed to ap pear in person and file counter-affidavit. Counter- affidavit has been filed with an-nexures. The taking of Baba Kishan Das has been denied. The admitted case of the parties is that the petitioner is not the owner of the disputed property. The case of the petitioner is that Baba Kishan Das has been performing religious rituals at the disputed land which is being alleged by the Nagar Nigam to be belonging to the Nagar Nigam. Nagar Nigam also lodged First Information Reports admittedly against Balram Nigam, Vipin Nigam. Guddu, Ajai Nigam, Ashok Yadav on several dales al leging encroachment on Government land by the accused persons. Opposite parties 3 and 4 are the officers of the Nigam who are, according to them, per forming their official functions. The petitioners allege that the officers of the Nagar Nigam use force and dispossessed everyone from the disputed property and have also put the disputed properly for auction for which publication was made in the Newspapers, Annexure No. 7 r. i the writ petition. It is alleged by the petitioner that during this dispossession the alleged detenu was taken away by the opposite par ties 3 and 4. It is alleged that Ashok Yadav the alleged tresspasser and against whom the F. I. Rs. have been lodged moved applica tion, Annexure No. 6 to the writ petition, before the S. S. R for Inquiry/investigation for punishing the persons responsible for dispossession as well as for abducting the Pujari Baba Kishan Das but no action has been taken. It may also be mentioned that the alleged tresspassers against whom the F. I. Rs. were lodged have also filed writ petitions etc. for the stay of their arrest, for those alleged offences. Learned counsel for opposite par ties 3 and 4 argues that the Government servants have got nothing to do with the commission of any offence and they are simply complying with the orders of the higher authorities to prevent the un authorised occupation and tresspass over Government land and that the allegations about the alleged abduction and the al leged moving of the application have been done as a counter measure in retaliation to thwart the Nagar Nigam from taking legal steps to protect the public property. It is also submitted on behalf of the op posite parties 3 and 4 that the petitioner instead of taking recourse to other avail able modes have approached this Court directly which is not permissible under law as alternative remedy are available.
(3.) SINCE alternative remedy is avail able, therefore, this petition is not main tainable and is also of no merit. The taking away of Baba Kishan Das has been specifi cally denied. The writ petition, therefore, is not maintainable has got no force and has to be dismissed. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed. .;