1 2026:CGHC:3120 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 496 of 2026 • Bhagwati Dewangan W/o Shri Sunil Kumar Dewangan Aged About 35 Years Pesa- Rasoiya/ Dainik Majdoor Sash.Anu.Jati. Kanya Ashram Pantora Niwasi- Gram- Pantora Vikashkhand Baloda Zila Janjgir Champa C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Sachiv, Aadim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikash Vibhag, Mantralaya Naya Raipur (C.G.). 2. Aayukt Aadim Jati Tatha Anusuchit Jati Vikash Raipur District Raipur (C.G.). 3. Sahayak Aayukt Adivasi Vikash Janjgir Champa District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 4. Collector District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 5. Adhichika Sash.Anu.Jati Kanya Ashram Pantora, Vikashkhand- Baloda, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abdul Wahab Khan, Advocate. For State/Respondents : Mr. Aditya Bhardwaj, P.L. Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order on Board 19/01/2026 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, Respondent No. 3 be directed to produce before this Hon'ble Court all records pertaining to the petitioner's employment/service details during the previous years while she was working under him. 10.2 That the respondents be directed to DEEPTI JHA Digitally signed by DEEPTI JHA 2 expeditiously dispose of the application submitted by the petitioner (Annexure P-01) on its merits. 10.3 That any other relief that this Hon'ble Court deems fit be granted to the petitioner from the respondents.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was earlier engaged as daily wage labourers with the respondent department. However, since January, 2025 the petitioner was orally asked not to come to the work. The work is available and for which the respondent department is engaging other persons, however, petitioner is not being engaged in the same employment as daily wage employee. Petitioner has submitted the representation before the respondent No.3, which is also pending consideration and have not been decided till date since last more than 6 months. Similarly, situated employees have filed the writ petition bearing WPS No.70/2025, which was disposed of with a direction to consider the claim of the petitioner, if the work for the petitioner therein is available. He submits that this writ petition may also be disposed of in the similar terms and direction be issued to respondent No.3 to take the decision on the pending representation. 3. Learned State counsel submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner for deciding the representation submitted by them, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of the submission of counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed, permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation along with all relevant documents before the respondent No.3, and if, such a representation is submitted, the concerned authority shall consider and take decision on the representation in accordance with law expeditiously, keeping in mind availability of work, preferably within a further period of two months from the date of receipt of representation. 3 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. 6. Interlocutory application(s), pending if any, also stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Deepti Jha