JUDGMENT : 1. The present writ petition has been filed for issuance of direction upon the State respondents to stop construction of Indira Awas being made by the respondent no.6 with connivance of respondent no.5 over the land appertaining to Khata no.20, plot no.598, measuring an area of 3 decimals, village Korra, P.O. & P.S. Ichak, District Hazaribagh, which has been purchased by the petitioner from one Nathu Bhuiyan, son of Late Sohan Bhuiyan vide sale deed no.3665 dated 28th February, 2007. Further prayer has been made for issuance of direction upon the State respondents to make the petitioner’s land free from obstruction and to ensure that there should not be any construction of Indira Awas over the said land. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 3. The case of the petitioner is that there is no ingress and egress of the aforesaid land, as has been reported by the Circle Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh- respondent no.4 vide letter dated 19th January, 2019 addressed to the Sub Divisional Officer, Sadar, Hazaribagh- respondent no.3 in connection with Case no.16 of 2017 initiated under Section 147 Cr.P.C. Further case of the petitioner is that the vendor of the said land had permitted the petitioner to use part of the same for ingress and egress purpose over which an Indira Awas has been sanctioned in favour of the respondent no.6. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos.2, 3 & 4, contending inter alia that a report was submitted by the respondent no.4 in connection with Case no.16 of 2017 before the respondent no.3, in which it was wrongly mentioned that the petitioner did not have any access to the said land. In fact, as per the report submitted by the respondent no.5, the petitioner has got a path with the main road from other side of his land, which is also evident from the map, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve any relief from this Court. 5. Admittedly, a proceeding under Section 147 Cr.P.C. concerning the present dispute was initiated by the respondent no.3. The question as to whether the petitioner has ingress and egress of the land in question is factual in nature. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve any relief from this Court. 5. Admittedly, a proceeding under Section 147 Cr.P.C. concerning the present dispute was initiated by the respondent no.3. The question as to whether the petitioner has ingress and egress of the land in question is factual in nature. The petitioner’s grievance is that Nathu Bhuiyan while selling the said land to the petitioner had permitted him to use part of the same as road, however, at the instance of the respondent no.6, construction of an Indira Awas over the land has been sanctioned. If the petitioner has any grievance against use of the land by the respondent no.6 for construction of Indira Awas, he has alternative recourses available under law. 6. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court does not see any reason to entertain the present writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.