Judgment :- 1. The dispute raised in this writ is with regard to the title of the property on the ground that plot on which the second respondent is trying to raise construction by getting planning permission, vests with the petitioner. 2. By claiming title, to the property prayer has been made in the writ petition seeking a writ in the nature of prohibition, restraining, the first respondent from sanctioning the building plan. 3. The prayer of the petitioner cannot be accepted, as no writ in the nature of prohibition, can be issued against the statutory authority to exercise power vested in under law. No order has been placed on record which can be said to be in violation of any rules or regulations. 4. Even otherwise, the petitioner if aggrieved by the grant of patta in favour of the second respondent, has the remedy under Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. 5. The dispute raised in this petition is regarding title to the property, which can be adjudicated only in the Civil Court, not before this Court under writ jurisdiction. 6. For the reasons stated, this writ petition is not competent, as the petitioner has alternative remedy under the Patta Pass Book Act, 1983. If there is a dispute with respect of title, parties are to go to Civil Court, and decision of the Civil Court would binding on authorities, in terms of section 14 of Patta Pass Book Act 1983. 7. Consequently, finding no merit in the writ petition, it is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.