Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 15902 (CHH)

SHYAMLAL MARKAM v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/1041/2026 · 2026-01-28

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 / 2026:CGHC:4883 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1041 of 2026 Shyamlal Markam S/o Samaru Ram Markam Aged About 60 Years Working As Field Assistant, Matsya Mahasangh, Demar Area, Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahakari Matsya Mahasangh Maryadit, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Fishiculture Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Chhattisgarh Rajya Sahakari Matsya Mahasangah Maryadit, Raipur, District Raipur C.G., Through Its Managing Director. ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Goutam Khetrapal, Advocate For Respondents- State : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 29/01/2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/order, thereby directing the respondent authorities to decide the pending representation of petitioner for grant of ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.01.30 15:06:53 +0530 2 / increment/Samayman Vetanman, with arrears, within stipulated time, in accordance with law. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner has already submitted representation before the competent authority i.e. respondent no. 2 and therefore, direction be issued to concerned authority to consider and take decision on representation at the earliest within specified time frame. 3. Learned counsel for State submits that in view of limited prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of submission made by learned counsel for respective parties, without entering into the merits of the case, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage, directing respondent no. 2 to consider and take decision on pending representation submitted by petitioner in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the order passed by this Court. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition is disposed of. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza