1 / 3 2025:CGHC:49760 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5218 of 2025 Shanti Punarvas Samiti Reg. No. 18825, 164/33, Shantinagar, Balco, Ward No. 35, District Korba Through Vinay Yadav, S/o Rambai Lal Yadav, Aged About 29 Years, R/o 23/3 Shanti Nagar, Balco, W. No. 39, District Korba C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Forest and Climate Change, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur C.G 2 - Sub Divisional Officer, Korba, District- Korba C.G. 3 - Collector Korba, District- Korba C.G. 4 - Bharat Aluminum Company Limited, Through Its Chief Executive Officer And Whole Time Director, Bharat Aluminium Company Limited, Balco Nagar, Korba, District- Korba C.G. 5 - Deputy Director Industrial Health And Safety, Korba, District- Korba C.G. 6 - Assistant Labor Commissioner, Korba, District- Korba C.G. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Advocate appears through video conferencing assisted by Ms. Mahima Chandra, Advocate For State : Mr. Rishabh Bisen, PL ASHUTOSH MISHRA Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH MISHRA Date: 2025.10.10 11:16:12 +0530 2 / 3 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma) Order on Board 07/10/2025 1. By way of the instant petition, the petitioner has challenged the action of Respondent No.4 for not providing the rehabilitation benefits on account of construction of cooling tower. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner has made representation to the Collector, Korba, C.G. for compliance of rehabilitation scheme on 01/09/2025, however, the said representation has not been decided, therefore, the Collector may be directed to decide the same. 3. Learned State counsel submits that they have no objection in deciding the representation of the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, Respondent No.3 is directed to decide the representation dated 01/09/2025 after giving proper opportunity of hearing to respondent No.4 expeditiously as soon as possible in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondent authorities shall decide the representation of the petitioner on its own merits. 3 / 3 7. With the aforesaid observation, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. SD/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) JUDGE ashu