1 2026:CGHC:14812 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1892 of 2020 Sameer Das S/o Shri S. Das, aged abut 46 years, Proprietor- Maa Danteshwari Decorators & Tent House Main Road, Dantewada, District Uttar Bastar Dantewada Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Public Works Department, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Assistant Commissioner, Triable Development Department, Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Collector South Bastar Dantewada, District Dantewada Chhattisgarh. 4 - General Manager, N.M.D.C. Circle Kirandul, District South Bastar Dantewada Chhattisgarh, District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from Case Information System Software.) For Petitioner : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate. For Respective Respondents : Mr. Sourabh Kale, Counsel on behalf of Mr. Trivikram Nayak, Advocate and Mr. Sourabh Sonwani, Advocate. Digitally signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 30.03.2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of the order passed on 13.07.2018, the petitioner has provided the requisite work which has been assigned to the petitioner as per the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Dantewada. He further submits that the petitioner has completed the work assigned to him in respect of catering, tent service etc. However, according to the petitioner the total bill as well as the amount which is required to be paid by the Tribal Department has not been paid till date though several applications have been filed by him. 2. Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter and considering the documents annexed by the petitioner especially the order dated 13.07.2018 as well as 20.08.2018 by which the petitioner was directed to complete the work as well as provide the services rendered by the petitioner in respect of catering, tent etc. the respondent authorities are directed to consider the claim of the petitioner and pass an appropriate orders in accordance with law. However, it is made clear that this Court has not passed any orders on merits of the case and it is upon the respondent authorities to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law while taking consideration of this aspect that according to their order the petitioner has complied with and provided the services of catering, tent, etc as required by the authorities. This exercise 3 be done within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to approach before the authorities concerned while placing the order of this Court before the concerned authorities in order to get relief which the petitioner has sought for. 3. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE U.K. Raju