1 2025:CGHC:20412 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 991 of 2020 • Rishabh Agrawal S/o Vinod Kumar Agrawal Aged About 30 Years R/o Ward No. 7, Sakti, Police Station Sakti, District - Janjgir Champa Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1. The Commissioner Bilaspur Division, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Collector, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited A Government Of India Enterprises Through Its General Manager, 17 Jamshedji Tata Road, Mumbai, Maharashtra 4. Ritesh Agrawal S/o Shri Rup Chand Agrawal R/o Shakti, Tehsil Shakti, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 5. Janki Bai Banjare Saarpanch Gram Panchayat Borda, Tahsil Shakti, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 6. Bharat Lal Banjare Commissioner Bilaspur Division, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 For Respondent No. 3 For Other Respondents : : : Mr. Sanjeev Agrawal, Panel Lawyer Mr. Ali Asgar, Advocate None Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 05/05/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 13.03.2020 (ANNEXURE P/1) passed by the respondent no. 1, in the interest of justice. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to pass stricture against respondent Commissioner and also grant any other relief, as if may deem fit and appropriate. 10.3 Cost of the petition may also be given.” Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 2. Mr. Rajkumar Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that no objection certificate was issued by the Collector in favour of the petitioner to operate petrol retail outlet on 27.05.2019. He would submit that challenging the said permission, WPC No. 3853/2019 and WPC No. 3854/2019 were filed before the High Court. He would contend that an application was moved before the Commissioner and the said authority vide order dated 13.03.2020 stayed functioning of retail outlet till disposal of both writ petitions. He would submit that above referred writ petitions have already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2025 in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the order passed by the Commissioner may quashed. 3. Mr. Ali Aagar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 and Mr. Sanjeev Agrawal, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2 would endorse the submission made by Mr. Rajkumar Sahu. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that the interim order was passed against the petitioner by the Commissioner on 13.03.2020 till disposal of WPC No. 3853/2019 and WPC No. 3854/2019. As both above referred petitions have already been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 01.04.2025, the order passed by the Commissioner dated 13.03.2020 is not sustainable in the eyes of law, according same is hereby quashed. 6. Consequently, the petition is allowed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti