1 2026:CGHC:7737 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CONT No. 215 of 2026 Premshankar Shrivastava S/o Late Johari Lal Shrivastava Aged About 71 Years R/o Ward No. 19 Lohara Road, Near Railway Fatak, Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner. Versus 1. Divya Umesh Mishra Collector, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh 2. Mobin Ali Chief Municipal Officer Nagar Palika Parishad, Balod, District : Balod, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents. For Petitioner : Mr. Aman Upadhyay, Advocate. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi ) Order on Board 12/02/2026 1. This Contempt Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 10 & 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act for non-compliance of order dated 18.11.2025 passed by this Court in WPC No.6004/2025 (Premshankar Vs. State of CG and Ors). 2. While passing order dated 18.11.2025 in WPC No.6004/2025 the co- ordinate Bench of this Court has made following observation:- "5. Taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the proceedings as discussed in preceding Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI DN: cn=AJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, ou=HIGH COURT, o=HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN Date: 2026.02.12 17:03:29 +0530 2 paragraphs by the Food Security Officer, dismissal of the writ petition filed by the respondent No.6 as also the writ appeal and further submission counsel of the petitioner that respondent No.6 is still running mutton and chicken shop by the side of the house of the petitioner, even after cancellation of the Food License issued in his favour, at this stage, the writ petition stands disposed of, directing respondents No.2 to 5 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order." 3. Perusal of aforesaid order would show that 3 weeks' time was granted to decide the representation of the petitioner, however, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner's representation has not been decided by the respondents/Authorities yet. 4. Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. AG for the State is present before the Court. He is directed to instruct the respondents to decide the representation filed by the petitioner in compliance of order dated 18.11.2025 passed in WPC No.6004/2025 within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt/communication of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ajay