1 2026:CGHC:14667 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2754 of 2020 1 - Suraj Singh Aayam Son Of Balbhadra Singh Aayam Aged About 48 Years Resident Of Village Beljhiriya, P.S. And Tahsil Marwahi, District Gourela Pendra Marwahi (Chhattisgarh), District : Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh 2 - Dhan Singh Son Of Radhe Singh Aged About 42 Years Resident Of Village Dhuma, Post Office Bagrar, P.S. And Tahsil Marwahi, District Gourela Pendra Marwahi (Chhattisgarh), District : Gaurela-Pendra- Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Atal Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh), District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Divisional Manager Iffco-Tokio, General Insurance Company Ltd. Shop No. 205, Second Floor, M.M. Silver Plaza, Near Mining Office, Mahavir Nagar, Ring Road-1, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh- 492006, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector District Gourela Pendra Marwahi (Chhattisgarh), District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh 4 - Chief Executive Officer, Zila Sahakari Kendriya Bank Maryadit, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahakari Samiti Marwahi, District Gourela Pendra Marwahi (Chhattisgarh), District : Gaurela-Pendra-Marwahi, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.03.28 12:00:23 +0530 2 For Petitioners : None For State : Ms. Akanksha Verma, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.2 : Ms Shrejal Gupta, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 27.03.2026 1 None appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition even in two rounds. 2 Ms. Akanksha Verma, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State as well as Ms. Shrejal Gupta, learned counsel holding brief of Mr. Vaibhav Shukla, learned counsel for respondent No.2, are present. 3 The petitioners have filed this writ petition with the following prayers:- “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities particularly respondent no. 2 to release the list and amount of petitioners as per said scheme/policy with interest w.e.f. date of policy, in the interest of justice. (ii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.” 4 Today, when the case is called, learned counsel for the petitioners is not present nor any representation made on behalf of the petitioners to press this petition on repeated calls and it appears 3 that the petitioners have lost interest in pursuing the matter, as such this Court has left with no other option, but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution. 5 Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh