Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 54233 (CHH)

SMT. SUNITA SHARMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/3590/2022 · 2025-05-01

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:20224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3590 of 2022 1 - Smt. Sunita Sharma W/o Shri Bhagwan Das Sharma Aged About 54 Years R/o Ward No 15, Chakarbhatha Negar Panchayat Bodri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Urban Administration, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Bilaspur District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 3 - Joint Director Urban Administration And Development Department , Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Panchayat Bodri, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Sanjeev Verma, Advocate For State : Shri Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.4 : Ms. Ruchi Nagar, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.06.07 15:42:17 +0530 2 02/05/2025 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the has filed an application for allotment of a shop and for the said shop she has paid 25% of the due amount and she is ready to pay the rest of the due amount, however, till date, no action has been taken by respondent No.4/Chief Municipal Officer, Bodri. 2. Considering the aforesaid submission, when a query was put to learned counsel appearing for respondent No.4/Chief Municipal Officer, it has been submitted that if the petitioner approaches before the concerned authority along with an application, the same will be decided in accordance with law. 3. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, respondent No.4/Chief Municipal Officer is directed to decide the matter within 60 days from the date of production of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits of the case. 4. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Gopal Singh