Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 47640 (CHH)

SAGURAM NETAM v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/5985/2023 · 2025-11-06

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:54482 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5985 of 2023 Saguram Netam S/o Shri Asharam Netam, aged about 31 years, R/o Block Colony, Dantewada, District Dantewada 494449 (C.G.) --- Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan North Block Sector 19, Nava Raipur District Raipur 492101 (C.G.). 2 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar, Division Jagdalpur District Bastar 494223, (C.G.). 3 - Superintendent Engineer Public Works Department, Bastar 494223. (C.G.) --- Respondents WPS No. 6046 of 2023 Mahendra Pandey S/o Shri D.P. Pandey, aged about 36 years, R/o Vikash Nagar, Kushabhau Ward, Dharampura No-1, Jagdalpur, District Bastar - 494223 (C.G.) ---Petitioner Versus 1 – State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Public Works Department, Nirman Bhawan North Block Sector 19, Nava Raipur District Raipur - 492101, (C.G.) Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 2 - Chief Engineer Public Works Department, Nava Raipur, District Raipur - 492101 (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Public Works Department, North Bastar, Division No. 2 District - Bastar - 494223 (C.G.) --- Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System Software) For Petitioners : None. For State : Mr. Dashrath Lal Prajapati, P.L. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 07.11.2025 1. Today this matter is listed for hearing, despite repeated calls, no one appears for the petitioners, nor there is any representation made on their behalf. 2. The appeal is of the year 2023, it appears that with the efflux of time, the petitioners have lost the interest in contesting the petitions. 3. In view of the petitioners’ non-prosecution and failure to prosecute the matter diligently, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the batch of petitions for want of prosecution. It is dismissed as such. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju