1 2025:CGHC:37124-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 541 of 2025 Bhim Prasad S/o Mannu Lal Aged About 46 Years R/o Gram Podi, Post Mudhali Tahsil Katghora, District Korba (Chhattisgarh) Presently R/o Khokhara, Tahsil Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District - Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. Through The Director (Personnel), Seepat, Road, Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh). 2 - Chief General Manager, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Gavera Ex- tension Opencast Project, Gavera Area, District Korba (Chhattisgarh), 3 - Land Revenue Officer, South Eastern Coalfields Ltd., Office Of The General Manager, Gavera Extension Opencast Project, Gavera Area, District- Korba (Chhattisgarh), 4 - Collector, Korba, District- Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Anniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate For State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 30 .0 7 .2025 1. Today, the matter is listed on default as the present appeal is barred by 53 days, but the delay application is not filed. 2. Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate appearing ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.07.30 18:18:02 +0530 2 for the State has no objection if delay in filing the appeal is condoned, therefore, we condone the delay of 53 days in filing the present appeal. 3. With the consent of the parties, the present appeal is heard finally. 4. Heard Mr. Anniruddha Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate General, appearing on behalf of the State. 5. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No.2325 of 2025, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the writ petitioners. 6. It has been pointed out by learned counsel for the parties that in an identical matter, this Court had dismissed Writ Appeal No.492 of 2025 vide order dated 18.07.2025 observing as follows : “8. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition i.e. WPS No.2327 of 2018 vide order dated 06.03.2025, holding that a perusal of the applications would show that the writ petitioner along with others moved application along with affidavit before the SECL authorities for the grant of additional compensation in lieu of the 3 employment and those applications were accepted by the SECL authorities and the writ petitioner herein was paid Rs.60,000/- additional compensation in lieu of the employment. Further, taking into consideration the fact that the writ petitioner has already accepted the additional compensation in lieu of the employment, the learned Single Judge concluded that nothing survives for adjudication in the petition preferred by the writ petitioner. 9. Considering the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and the finding recorded by the learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner / appellant herein, we notice that the same has been rendered with cogent and justifiable reasons. In an intra-court appeal, no interference is usually warranted unless palpable infirmities are noticed on a plain reading of the impugned order. In the facts and circumstances of the instant case, on a plain reading of order, we do not notice any such palpable infirmity or perversity, as such, we are not inclined to interfere with the 4 impugned order. 10. Accordingly, the writ appeal being devoid of merit is liable to be and is hereby dismissed. No cost(s).” They further submitted that since the facts and issue involved in the present case is identical to that of Writ Appeal No.492 of 2025, this appeal may also be disposed off in the same terms. 7. Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the materials on record, it is evident that the facts and issue involved in this appeal is identical to Writ Appeal No.492 of 2025, this Court deems it appropriate not to take a view other than what has been taken in Writ Appeal No.492 of 2025. 8. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed in terms of the order dated 18.07.2025 passed in Writ Appeal No.492 of 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu