1 2026:CGHC:24768 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2908 of 2026 Rajesh Kumar Sao S/o- Shri Shyam Lal Sao, Aged About 45 Years Occupation- Fad Prabhari, Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Lahangar, Registration No. 868, Paddy Procurement Center- Lahangar, R/o- Village- Jalki Ward No. 1, Tahsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.) . .. Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Co- Operative Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar New Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 3 - District Co-Operative Markfed Officer Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 4 - Deputy Commissioner/ Deputy Registrar Co-Operative Society, Mahasamund, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 5 - Branch Manager, Zila Sahkari Kendriya Bank Maryadit Raipur, Branch Sirpur, District- Mahasamund (C.G.) 6 - Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Lahangar, Registration No. 868, Through Its Prescribed Officer, Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Lahangar, Tahsil And District- Mahasamund (C.G.). ... Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Sahu, Advocate For the State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, PL. For Respondent No.3/Markfed : Mr. Harshal Chouhan, Advocate. For Respondent No.5/Bank : Mr. Anniruddha Shrivastava, Advocate on behalf of Mr. SS Baghel, Advocate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Hon'ble Mr. Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 18.06.2026 1. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent No.3/Markfed submits that that instant petition is pre-mature as on date no orders has been passed against the petitioner, as such, petitioner has rust this Court without their being any orders only on apprehension. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is globed that action will be taken against the petitioner, as such, this petition has been filed. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Considering facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties, particularly the fact that as on date no order has been passed against the petitioner, as such, this Court finds that no cause presently exists for entertaining the petition at this stage. 5. According, the instant petition is hereby dismissed. However, in case any exigency arises in future, petitioner will be at liberty to file appropriate petition. CC as per rules. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge J.