Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15586 (CHH)

MOTIRAM NISHAD v. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/195/2026 · 2026-01-15

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:2687-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 195 of 2026 Motiram Nishad S/o Shri Mangalu Nishad Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Masankuda, Village Panchayat Amoda, Post Lendra, Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - The State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Excise, Mahanadi Bhavan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - The Collector, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh C.G. 3 - District Excise Officer/ Collector (Excise), District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh C.G. 4 - Murari Patel S/o Shri Shyamlal Patel Aged About 39 Years R/o Village Lendra, Police Station Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh C.G. ... Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Roop Ram Naik, Advocate For Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 /State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Additional Advocate General ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Mr. Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 16.01.2026 1. Heard Mr. Roop Ram Naik, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Shashank Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State-respondent Nos. 1 to 3. ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with the following prayers :- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issued appropriate writ by directing the respondents State authority to cancel the tender / liquor shop over the land of the respondent No. 4 i.e. bearing Khasra No. 338/5 area 0.2270 hectare, situated at Village Lendra, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh- Bilaigarh (C.G.) which is adjacent near about Village Masankuda, Government Primary School, Aangan Badi Center and Nistari Pond. 10.2) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue any other suitable writ/orders/directions in favour of the petitioner looking to the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. Learned State Counsel has pointed out that this is the second round of litigation. Earlier, the petitioner had approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 6437 of 2025, seeking the cancellation of the tender/proposed liquor shop near Village Masankuda, specifically at Khasra No. 338/5, covering an area of 0.2270 hectares, situated at Village Lendra, Block Baramkela, District Sarangarh-Bilaigarh (C.G.). This petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of the Court vide an order dated 11.12.2025, directing Respondent No. 2/Collector to consider and take a decision on the pending representation submitted by the petitioner, ensuring that all his objections were considered by the Competent Authority. The subsequent order dated 24.12.2025 passed by the Collector (Excise), marked as Annexure-P/1, is now under challenge in the present petition. Furthermore, learned counsel for the State submitted that, since the petitioner is seeking a direction to cancel the tender/liquor shop over the land 3 in question in the prayer clause, the matter is listed before this Court. However, this matter is not related to the tender itself, as the petitioner is challenging Annexure-P/1 in the present petition, which pertains to the decision to open a liquor shop at the specified location. 4. Upon being asked by the Court why the petitioner is seeking cancellation of the tender in the prayer clause, instead of directly challenging Annexure-P/1, learned counsel for the petitioner was unable to provide a satisfactory explanation. This indicates that the petition, as drafted, is in a very casual manner, leading to a waste of the Court's precious time. In the opinion of this Court, this raises concerns about the manner in which the petition has been presented. 5. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh petition with proper prayers and pleadings, subject to depositing a sum of Rs.5,000/- as cost by the petitioner before the Registry of this Court and submit a receipt of the same at the time of filing of the fresh petition, if any, and the amount so deposited, if any, shall be transmitted to the Government Home for Mentally Underdeveloped Children Mana Camp, District - Raipur (C.G.). Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra