1 2026:CGHC:5181-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 100 of 2026 Ekta Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuha Through Its President Smt. Gayatri Bai Patel, Aged About 42 Years, W/o Bhuvneshwar Patel, R/o Village Tenduwa, Tahsil Saja, Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department of Food, Civil, Supply And Consumer Protection Mantralaya Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Collector Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 3. Sub Divisional Officer Saja Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 4. Food Inspector Saja, Tehsil Saja, Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 5. Jai Ma Durga Bhawani Mahila Sawa Sahayata Samuh Tenduwa Through President Kamal Hasan, W/o Malik Ram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Tenduwa, Tahsil Saja, Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. 6. Jai Satnam Mahila Swa Sahayata Samuh, Gudwa Through President Lula, W/o Shantanu, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Gudwa, Tahsil Saja, Distt. Bemetara, Chhattisgarh. ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Varun Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.01.30 17:35:45 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 30 .01.2026 1. Heard Mr. Varun Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State. 2. The present intra-court appeal has been preferred by the appellant assailing the order dated 25.08.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 4527 of 2025 (Jai Ma Durga Bhawani Mahila Sava Sahayaeta Samuh vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner/respondent No. 5 herein was allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was not a party to WPC No. 4527 of 2025. After cancellation of the fair price shop of respondent No. 5, the said shop was allotted to the appellant. However, the writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge vide the impugned order dated 25.08.2025. Thereafter, the appellant filed a fresh writ petition bearing WPC No. 6622 of 2025, which came to be dismissed on 19.12.2025, wherein the learned Single Judge directed the appellant to avail the remedy available under law by initiating appropriate proceedings against the order passed in WPC No. 4527 of 3 2025. Hence, the present appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 25.08.2025. 4. Considering the fact that the appellant was not a party to the said writ petition, it was observed that if the appellant had any grievance, he could take recourse to law before the learned Single Judge who passed the impugned order dated 25.08.2025 in WPC No. 4527 of 2025. 5. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present appeal with liberty to file a review petition before the learned Single Judge. 6. Learned State counsel has no objection to the said prayer. 7. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, the present writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan