1 2025:CGHC:49328 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5192 of 2025 Arpanchal Lok Manch, Through Its President Siddhanshu Mishra S/o Manohar Lal Mishra Aged About 40 Years R/o A-39 Murli Kunj Seepat Road Near Water Tank Songanga Colony District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Home Affairs, Mahanadi Bhavan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Superintendent Of Police District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Sub Divisional Magistrate Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, Through Its Commissioner, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Principal, Govt. E. Raghvendra Rao P.G. Science College Sarkanda Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Arjit Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. AG. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 25.09.2025 1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “10. RELIEF (S) SOUGHT: i. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present writ petition and kindly set-aside the impugned order dated 02.09.2025whereby the permission to conduct dusshera has been denied. ii. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly direct to the Respondent authorities to allow the Petitioner to carry out dusshera and necessary steps may be taken in accordance to law thereafter. iii. Any other relief(s) in favor of Petitioners as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case with cost.” 2. After arguing for some time, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this writ petition may be disposed of with a direction to the concerned respondent-authority to consider and decide the pending representation of the petitioner Annexure P-6 within any specified time frame in accordance with law/rules. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State submits that he is having no objection to the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioner. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Considering facts of the case, nature of relief, submissions of counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed of at this stage 3 directing the concerned respondent-authority to consider and decide the pending application/representation of the petitioner Annexure P/6, expeditiously, in accordance with relevant rule/law/regulation. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-