1 2026:CGHC:23480 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2682 of 2026 1 - Satyaprakash Son Of Sukhdev Aged About 57 Years Resident Of Shantipara, Subhashnagar, Police Station Gandhinagar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, P. O. And P. S. Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner Surguja Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3 - Collector Surguja, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 4 - Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue) Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5 - Tahsildar Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 6 - Abhishek Khaira S/o Mandhari Ram Aged About 44 Years R/o Gandhinagar, Police Station Gandhinagar, Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 7 - Vivek Agrawal, S/o Shri Ashok Agrawal, Aged About 43 Years, R/o Ward No. 27, Thana Road Mahamaya Prizes, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri VK Pandey, Advocate through VC. For State/ Res : Shri Rohitasva Singh, Dy GA. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas) Order on Board 26/05/2026 1. The present Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:- 10.1 issue notices to the respondents returnable AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2026.05.26 16:57:33 +0530 2 within early date of hearing. 10.2 direct the respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the review filed by the petitioner vide its Case No. 202505960100126/A-21(1)/2024-25 parties being "Satyaprakash Vs. Abhishek Khaira & Another" within stipulated period in accordance with law. 10.3 grant any other relief(s)/ order(s)/ direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which deemed fit & proper in the facts & circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice. 10.4 Cost of the petition. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has preferred a review application before the learned Commissioner Surguja Division bearing case No.202505960100126/A-21(1)/2024-25 on 27.05.2025 (Annexure P/5) for review of order dated 28.04.2025, which is still pending. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this Writ Petition may be disposed of with a direction to Respondent No.2 to decide the said review application within a period of two months, which will survive the purpose of filing this petition. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that order sheet dated 21.04.2026 passed in the review application indicates that records have been directed to be called, therefore, Respondent No.2 can be directed to decide the pending review application of the petitioner, if not decided yet. 5. Considering the limited prayer made by the petitioner, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the Respondent No.2 to decide 3 the review application of the petitioner (Annexure P/5) within a period of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if not decided yet. 6. With the aforesaid observation/direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. 7. It is made clear that this court has not examined any merits of the contention of the parties and Respondent No.2 shall decide the review application on its own merits, in accordance with law. 8. Consequently, I.A No.1/2026, application for hearing the case during summer vacation and I.A. No.2/2026, application for urgent hearing also stand disposed of. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Avinash