1 2025:CGHC:45759-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 659 of 2025 1 - Punyvas Baghel S/o Shri Lachindar Baghel Aged About 32 Years (Now -39) Years R/o Village And Post Devda Block And Tahsil Bakawand District- Bastar, Chhattisgarh 2 - Smt. Bindu Dhruv W/o Shri Daulal Dhruv Aged About 42 Years (Now -49) Years R/o Village Kulgaon, Post Sadgud, Tehsil Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 3 - Smt. Amita Kashyap W/o Shri Dinesh Kashyap Aged About 35 Years (Now -42) Years R/o Village Erikpal Post Ermur Block Lohandiguda, Tahsil Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 4 - Smt. Dhanmati Sethiya W/o Shri Tarun Sethiya Aged About 31 Years (Now - 38) Years R/o Village And Post Nangur Tahsil Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 5 - Smt. Gajbati Baghel W/o Shri Dalsay Baghel Aged About 31 Years (Now - 38) Years R/o Village Mahakapal (Khaspara) Post Teli, Marenga Block And Police Station Darbha, Tahsil Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) 6 - Lachhuram Kashyap S/o Shri Sonuram Kashyap Aged About 35 Years (Now -42) Years R/o Village And Post Chhapar Bhanpuri Tahsil Tokapal, District - Bastar (C.G.) 7 - Dharmuram Durga S/o Late Shri Ramuram Durga Aged About 43 Years (Now- 50) Years R/o Village And Post Kodenar Rly Colony, Tahsil Bastanar, District - Bastar (C.G.) ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.09.09 15:42:52 +0530 2 8 - Suman Kashyap D/o Shri B.R. Kashyap Aged About 40 Years (Now - 48) Years R/o Village Bhond, Post Lamker Block Bastar, Tahsil Jagdalpur District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Appellants versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Panchayat And Social Welfar, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District - Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Bastar, Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, (C.G.) 3 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Jagdalpur, District- Bastar, (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, Advocate For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, Additional Advocate General For Respondents No.2 and 3 : Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 09.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. Avinash K. Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondent No.1 and Mr. C. Jayant K. Rao, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 and 3. 3 2. The present intra Court appeal has been preferred by the appellants assailing the order dated 30.07.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 6792 of 2018 and analogous cases, whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petitions with a direction to respondent No.2, Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Bastar, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C.G.), and the District Collector, Bastar, to decide the pending representations of the writ petitioners expeditiously, preferably within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. It was further directed that the writ petitioners would be at liberty to make fresh representation(s), if so advised, within the said period of 90 days, and the interim order granted earlier shall remain effective during that period. The learned Single Judge also observed that the advertisement dated 07.03.2018 shall remain subject to the final outcome of the representation(s) made by the writ petitioners. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though the representation(s), which are stated to have been decided by the District Magistrate/Collector, the Collector was not impleaded as a party respondent in the writ petitions preferred by the writ petitioners. It is contended that the grievance of the appellants/writ petitioners, which was placed before the learned Single Judge, has not been effectively addressed, and without adjudicating upon the same, the impugned order has been passed. In these circumstances, learned counsel for the appellants prays for withdrawal of the present appeal with liberty to take recourse to appropriate remedy before the learned Single Judge. 4 4. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for respondents No.2 and 3 herein state that they have no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellants. 5. In view of the submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the appellants, the present writ appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. 6. As a consequence of the aforesaid discussion, I.A. No.02, which is an application filed by the appellants seeking leave of this Court for grant of permission to institute a common/joint writ appeal, does not merit consideration. Accordingly, the said application stands rejected. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu