1 2025:CGHC:36652 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1535 of 2025 1 - M/s Sai Sales And Service Berla A Registered Class C Contractor Firm Through Its Proprietor Aashish Kumar Soni Aged About 34 Years, S/o Shri Dhruw Soni R/o Ward No. 12, Berla, Tahsil Berla District Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Berla, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 4 - Nagar Panchayat Berla Through Its Chief Municipal Officer, Berla, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh 5 - Rohit Kumar Maheshwari Aged About 40 Years R/o Berla, Bemetara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) SUGUNA DUBEY Digitally signed by SUGUNA DUBEY Date: 2025.07.30 10:37:48 +0530 2 For Petitioner(s) : Shri Varun Sharma, Advocate For Respondent/State For Respondents 4 & 5 : : Ms.Akanksha Verna, PL None present. (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE ARVIND KUMAR VERMA) Order on Board 28/07/2025 Being aggireved by the inaction of the respondents authorities vide order dated 15.01.2025 (Annexure P/1), the petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking for the following reliefs: Ii) to kindly set aside the order impugned dated 15.01.2021 (Annexue P/1) and direct the respondent Collector to permit the petitioner to complete the work alloted to him as per the work order dated 26.11.2024. ii) to kindly direct therespondent not to further harass the petitioner and not to violate the fundamental right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of theConstitution of India which include releae of payment of running bills after due verifiation. iii) to kindlymake any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner form the respondent No.2.” 2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is a registered C- class proprietorship contractor firm registered with the Government of Chhattisgarh. The respondent-Nagar Panchayat Berla issue notice inviting tender No.344 dated 20.09.2024 for different development 3 works in the Nagar Panchayat area. The petitioner also submitted his bid and was selected for the aforesaid work and the work order was issued to the petitioner on 26.11.2024 by the respondent Nagar Panchayat Berla. Thereafter the petitioner invested money and mobilized his resources and started the road construction work. On 13.12.2024, the Chief Municipal Officer of Nagar Panchayat Berla directed the petitioner to stop the execution of work on the ground that complaint has been made by the Ward Councilor, Ward No.12 and others that the concrete mix-design has not been approved. The petitioner made representation against the stoppage of work which was allowed and the petitioner was directed to start the work with Paver blocks using crushed rocks (Murum) as it was the part of approved work estimate. However, on 01.01.2025, without giving any notice, the Chief Municipal Officer, referring to the letter of the Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) directed the petitioner to stop the work. On 02.01.2025, the petitioner made a representation to the Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat, Berla and spot inspection was made on 11.01.2025 and thereafter, SDO (Revenue) vide order dated 14.01.2025, petitioner was directed to start the road construction work from the shop of Dagrey to the house o f Ghanshyam Dwivedi measuring 59 meters and width of 8 meters. Again on 15.01.2025, respondent No.5 approached the collector, Bemetara and the impugned order was issued for constitution of committee of officers and to submit the report within a period of one week and till then the work was stopped. The petitioner again approached the Collector on 16.01.2025 to allow him to complete the work order but till date the Collector has not taken any decision. Hence, the present petition. 4 3. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has made a representation to the competent authority but till date the same has not been decided. He therefore submiss that direction may be issued for deciding his representation. 4. Counsel appearing for the State submits that let the petitioner make a fresh representation before the concerned authority and in turn his representation would be decided in an objective manner after due verification. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file fresh detailed representation assailing all his grievances raised in this petition along with this order before the concerned authority ie. Collector within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the order who in turn shall decide the same in accordance with law expeditiously. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge