1 2025:CGHC:36454 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3917 of 2025 1 - Ranveer Singh Rajput S/o Phul Singh Aged About 53 Years R/o Village- Gandai, Post- Pandariya, Chuikhadan-Gandai, District- Khairagarh-Chuikhadan- Gandai, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department Department, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Urban Administration And Development, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector Khairagarh- Chuikhadan-Gandai, District- Khairagarh-Chuikhadan- Gandai, C.G. 4 - Nagar Panchayat Gandai, Through Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Gandai, Khairagarh-Chuikhadan-Gandai, District- Kharagarh-Chuikhadan- Gandai, Chhattisgarh. ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Saket Pandey Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 28/07/2025 1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner is shop operator for several decades in the Nagar Panchayat Gandai, thereafter in year 2003-2004 petitioner was made to pay premium for Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.07.29 11:08:33 +0530 2 the sanction and allotment of new shop after the reconstruction of the premises then in year 2005 the fresh auctions was proposed. The collective writ petition was preferred before the Hon'ble Court and order was passed in W.P. No. 5999/2005 om 07/03/2011 by which the fresh auctions of shops was set aside. The petitioner also preferred a writ petition (c) no. 1861/2015 for allotment of shop and providing the rehabilitation upon which the order was passed on 27/03/2018 directing respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner. The council of Nagar Panchayat has approved the rehabilitation of petitioner by providing the land and constructing a shop but the collector and the state government have yet not approved or sanctioned the same proposal of the Council of Nagar Panchayat Gandai, therefore he prays for a direction to the concerned authorities to decide his representation (Annexure P/5). 3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to respondent-authorities to consider the pending application/ representation (Annexure P/5), she is having no objection to the limited prayer and if the claim of the petitioner is pending, it will be considered in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the respondent-authorities to consider/decide the representation of the petitioner on its own merits in accordance with 3 law as expeditiously as possible. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti