Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 975 (CHH)

SMT. RADHA BAI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/2814/2023 · 2026-08-24

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:25394 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2814 of 2023 Smt. Radha Bai W/o Heeralal Sahu Aged About 32 Years President - Nari Sakti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh, Sarekha, R/o Village Sarekha, Gram Panchayat Sarekha, Janpad Panchayat Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Food Public Distribution And Consumer Affairs, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Collector Kawardha, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh. 3 - Additional Collector Kawardha, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh. 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh. 5 - Shiv Sakti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Through- President Smt. Darniya Bai W/o Durgesh Sahu, R/o Village Barbhanwar, Gram Panchayat Sarekha, Janpad Panchayat - Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh 6 - Shiv Sakti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Through- Secretary, Smt. Keshar Bai W/o Kumbhlal Sahu, R/o Village Barbhanwar, Gram Panchayat Sarekha, Janpad Panchayat - Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh. 7 - Nari Sakti Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh Sarekha, Through- Secretary, Smt. Deepa Bai W/o Kirtan Sahu, R/o Village Sarekha, Gram Panchayat Sarekha, Janpad Panchayat - Bodla, District : Kawardha (Kabirdham), Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : None. For Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Mr. Praveen Das, Dy. AG. For Respondent Nos.5 & 6 : Mr. CK Sahu, Advocate. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 18.06.2025 1. When the matter is called out for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Even in the second call, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. 2. In view of the above, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 3. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-