1 2026:CGHC:22854 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4481 of 2022 1 - Awadh Kumar S/o Late Jagdish Prasad Aged About 50 Years R/o Village Aasandih, Janpad Panchayat, Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 4 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 5 - The Tahsildar Up - Tahsil Raghunathnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 6 - The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. 7 - The Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Aasandih, Janpad Panchayat, Wadrafnagar, District Balrampur Ramanujganj Chhattisgarh. VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. D.N. Prajapati, Advocate For State :- Mr. S.S. Choubey, G.A. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 14.05.2026 1. Learned State counsel submits that though at an earlier point of time the issue relating to “Gothan” was directed to be considered, at present there is no proposal of the State Government for construction of any Gothan at the site in question, and therefore the present petition has become infructuous. 2. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific order for construction of Gothan; however, the authorities have merely conducted an inspection of the land and on query have stated that construction of Gothan may be required at the relevant place. It is submitted that no final decision has been taken by the competent authority in this regard. 3. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, this Court finds that no subsisting or enforceable cause of action presently survives in favour of the petitioner warranting adjudication of the issue on merits. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be at 3 liberty to approach the competent authority or to avail appropriate remedy in accordance with law, if any fresh cause of action arises in future. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha