1. The petitioner had been served with a notice under Sec.7 of the Land Encroachment Act 1905 on 5. 2000 and thereafter a final order was passed in accordance with Sec.6 of the said Act. Immediately thereafter the petitioners occupation was removed. The petitioner has submitted his objections on 5. 2000. Thereafter the final order was passed under Sec.6 of the said Act on 20.6.2000. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order of the first respondent before the second respondent. The second respondent rejected the appeal filed by the petitioner in his proceedings dated 28. 2000, the impugned proceedings. Now the writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to quash the proceedings of the eviction and for restoration of possession to the petitioner.

2. When the petitioner has been served with a notice under the Land Encroachment Act, 1905 and the petitioners objections have been considered and a final order has been passed and it is also confirmed in the appeal finding that the petitioner is an encroacher, I am of the view that the writ petition itself is not maintainable.

3. The Supreme Court, in the case of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Nawab Khan