1 2025:CGHC:8525 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 964 of 2025 1 Smt. Pinglabai Dhritlahre Wd/o Late Mahesh Dhritlahre Aged About 34 Years R/o Village- Saviti, Police Station- Bagbahra, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Tribal Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur, ( C.G. ). 2 Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 3 Collector Mahasmund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 4 Suprintendent Of Police Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. 5 Sub- Divisional Officer ( Revenue ), Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.02.20 10:24:01 +0530 2 6 Station House Officer Police Station- Bagbahra, District- Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri Ravi Kumar Bhagat, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Shri Shreyansh Mehta, P.L. Hon'ble Justice Shri Bibhu Datta Guru Order on Board 19/02/2025 1. By the present writ petition the petitioner is seeking a direction towards respondents No. 3 to 5 to decide the representation filed by the petitioner dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure P-1). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a representation has been filed by the petitioner dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure P-1) seeking compensation under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 (for short ‘Rules of 1995’) before Respondents No. 3 to 5. He further submits that the representation has ben filed in the month of November, 2024 but has not been decided till date. 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the representation is still pending, the same will be considered and decided in accordance with the Rule 12 (4) of the Rules of 1995. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the 3 documents annexed along with the petition. 5. Considering the case of the petitioner, the Collector, Mahasamund (respondent No. 3) and the SDO (Revenue), Mahasamund (respondent No. 5) are directed to consider the case of the petitioner by examining the facts narrated by the petitioner and decide the representation filed by the petitioner dated 27.11.2024 (Annexure P-1) in accordance with the Rules of 1995 within a period of 50 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the petition stands disposed off. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Jyoti