Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55202 (CHH)

GANESIYA SINHA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

MCC/439/2025 · 2025-05-05

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:20638 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 439 of 2025 Ganesiya Sinha W/o Mohan Lal Sinha Aged About 52 Years President, Shiv Shakti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh, Than Khamhariya, Tahsil Than Khamhariya, Bock Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Secretary Food, Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. 4 - Additional Collector - 2 Bemetara, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. 5 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Saja, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. 6 - Tahsildar Tahsil Than Khamhariya, District Bemetara Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Applicant : Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, Advocate For Non applicants-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. Govt. Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 06.05.2025 1. Heard Mr. Praveen Dhurandhar, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Upasana Mehta, learned Deputy Government Advocate for the State/non-applicants. YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.05.08 11:11:53 +0530 2 2. By filing this MCC, the applicant has prayed for following relief:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the application and also be pleased to direct for modification/correction in the order dated 01- 04-2025 passed in WPC No.1648/2025 as mentioned above, in the ends of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that during the course of arguments, the learned counsel has wrongly stated that the matter is required to be considered by the Commissioner Raipur Division, whereas it should be Commissioner Durg Division, as such, he is praying that the order dated 01.04.2025 passed by this Court in WPC No.1648/2025 needs to be corrected accordingly. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State has no objection to the same. 5. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the present MCC is allowed. The order dated 01.04.2025 passed by this Court in WPC No.1648/2025, in place of “Commissioner Raipur Division”, it should be read as “Commissioner Durg Division”. 6. A copy of this order be placed along with the records of WPC No.1648/2025. Sd/- - (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh