1 2026:CGHC:27553 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1877 of 2023 Smt. Janita Bai Pandro W/o Brijmal Pandro Aged About 30 Years Caste Gond, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Mangatola, Janpad Panchayat A. Chowki, Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Mohla- Manpur- A, Chowki, District : Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (R) And Specified Officer (Gram Panchayat) Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 4 - The Tahsildar A. Chowki District- Mohla- Manpur- A. Chowki, Chhattisgarh 5 - Jyoti Bai W/o Jhagan Lal Aged About 28 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 6 - Johan Sahu S/o Judawan Aged About 53 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 7 - Devkumar S/o Dharmuram Aged About 30 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 8 - Hema Bai W/o Jageshwar Aged About 25 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 9 - Chumbai W/o Kamta Prasad Aged About 55 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 10 - Radhadevi W/o Kurama Aged About 50 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 11 - Mamta Damle W/o Mukesh Kumar Mahar Aged About 35 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.07.04 12:31:37 +0530 2 12 - Urvashi W/o Kiran Charan Gond Aged About 48 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur- Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 13 - Bharat Salame S/o Deenu Ram Gond Aged About 48 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 14 - Indrani Komre W/o Narendra Kumar Gond Aged About 35 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla-Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh 15 - Ram Chandra Korram S/o Budhram Gond Aged About 55 Years Panchas Village Panchayat Mangatola, R/o Village Mangatola, District : Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : None For State : Dr. Arham Siddiqui, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 03.07.2026 1. The instant writ petition has been filed calling in question the order dated 29.03.2023 passed by respondent No.2, whereby the revision preferred by the petitioner against the proceedings of no-confidence motion was dismissed at the admission stage. The case of the petitioner is that she was the elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat Mangitola, Janpad Panchayat Ambagarh Chowki, District Mohla- Manpur-Ambagarh Chowki (C.G.). According to the petitioner, respondent No.3 appointed the Tahsildar as Presiding Officer to conduct the no-confidence motion against her, which was scheduled to be held on 16.03.2023. It is the grievance of the petitioner that notice of the said meeting was served upon her only on 10.03.2023 and, therefore, the mandatory requirement of seven clear days’ notice, as contemplated under the Gram Panchayat ke Sarpanch tatha Up- Sarpanch, Janpad Panchayat tatha Zila Panchayat ke President tatha 3 Vice-President ke Virudh Avishwas Prastav Niyam, 1994, was not complied with. It is further pleaded that neither any proper opportunity was afforded to the petitioner nor were the principles of natural justice adhered to. On the aforesaid grounds, the petitioner has challenged the legality of the no-confidence motion and the revisional order dated 29.03.2023. 2. Today, none appears on behalf of the petitioner. 3. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner had already challenged the matter before the Collector and thereafter before this Court; however, during pendency of the present petition, the tenure of the petitioner as Sarpanch has come to an end and, therefore, the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous. 4. Considering the aforesaid submission of learned State counsel, particularly in view of the fact that the tenure of the petitioner has already come to an end and none appears on behalf of the petitioner to dispute the said position, this Court is of the view that the present writ petition has been rendered infructuous. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh