1 2025:CGHC:47697 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4957 of 2025 1 - Bhaskar Yadav S/o Shri Purushottam Lal Yadav Aged About 52 Years R/o Ganesh Chowk, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Tahsildar Tahsil- Bilapsur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Head Copyist Tahsil Office, Tahsil- Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Jitendra Chandrakar, Advocate For Respondent-State : Mr. Ajit Singh, G.A. Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 17/09/2025 1. With the consent of the parties the matter is heard finally. 2. By way of this second round of litigation, the petitioner is not challenging any particular order, but seeking a direction from this Court to direct the respondent authorities to provide the certified copy of entire order-sheets of Case No. 10/A-70/2016-17 titled as "Saraswati Sahu vs. K.P.S. Arora" (complete documents) within stipulated period. The petitioner submitted application form on 13.06.2025 before the Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.09.18 17:43:04 +0530 2 respondent No.5, but even after passing more than 30 days, the respondent No.5 has not provided the certified copy of the aforesaid documents to the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner applied for the same on 13.06.2025, but despite the lapse of over 30 days and a follow-up complaint to respondent authorities on 01.07.2025, no action has been taken. The respondents' inaction is arbitrary, illegal, and violates the petitioner's fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 19(1) (a) of the Constitution of India, as well as principles of natural justice, hence this petition. 4. 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, he is having no objection to the limited prayer and pending application dated 13.06.2025 and 23.07.2025 will be considered in accordance with law. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. 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 application of the petitioner (Annexure P-1) (Annexure P/5) dated 13.06.2025 & 23.07.2025 respectively in accordance with law/rules/regulations as expeditiously as possible within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 8. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Jyoti