JUDGMENT Dilip Gupta, J. The grievance of the petitioner is that the land bearing Gata No.723, which was originally in the name of his father is being encroached upon by the second respondent. The petitioner seeks a decision by the District Magistrate on his representation and a direction to the District Magistrate to ensure that the second respondent does not proceed any further in his illegal activity of occupying the land of the petitioner forcibly. 2. We are not inclined to direct the District Magistrate to decide the representation of the petitioner since the Collector/District Magistrate has no adjudicatory powers under law to decide upon civil disputes. If, according to the petitioner, the second respondent is in unlawful occupation of his land, the District Magistrate cannot be directed either to evict the second respondent or to resolve basically a civil dispute in regard to the alleged violation of rights of the petitioner. For this, the petitioner would have to seek recourse to the remedy of civil suit. We leave it open to the petitioner to do so and are unable to interfere despite persuasive submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petition is, accordingly, disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.