1 2026:CGHC:10941-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 158 of 2026 1 - M/s. Nuvoco Vistas Corporation Limited, (Formerly Lafarge India Private Limited ) Through Managing Director, Crecenzo Building , B - Wing, 10th Floor, C - 38 And 39, G Block, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra, East Mumbai - 400051, Maharastra, (At Present Having Registered Office In Equinox Business Park, Tower- 3, 4th Floor, Lbs Marg, Kurla (West Mumbai) 400070. 2 - Managing Director, Nuvoco Arasmeta Cement Plant ( Formerly Lafarge India Pvt. Limited ), Village Arasmeta, Tahsil Akaltara, Police Station And Post Office Akaltara, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh. 3 - A V P, Nuvoco Arasmeta Cement Plant (Formerly Lafarge India Pvt. Limited ), Village Arasmeta, Tahsil Akaltara, Police Station And Post Office Akaltara, District - Janjgir - Champa Chhattisgarh. ... Appellants versus 1 - Manrakhan Lal Awasthi (Died And Deleted In Writ Petition As Per Honble Court Order Dated- 05-09-2022.) 2 - Sandhya Trivedi D/o Manrakhan Lal Awasthi Aged About 37 Years R/o Quarter No. V - 8, Sunflower Apartment, Nayapara, Chakarbhata, Police Station And Post Office Chakarbhata, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellants : Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Deepali Pandey, Advocate ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2026.03.03 16:48:30 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 03.03.2026 1. Heard Mr. Bhaskar Payashi, learned counsel for the appellants and Ms. Deepali Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. The present intra Court appeal has been preferred by the appellants assailing the order dated 27.11.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 3811 of 2019, whereby the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition filed by the respondents herein. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that a specific objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition was raised before the learned Single Judge on the ground that the respondent– Company does not fall within the ambit of “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. It is contended that although such an objection was expressly urged, the same has not been adjudicated upon, and the writ petition has been disposed of by directing consideration of a representation. According to learned counsel, even a direction to consider representation carries civil consequences and ought not to have been issued without first deciding the issue of maintainability. Learned counsel therefore prays that the appellants may be permitted to withdraw the present writ appeal with liberty to approach the learned 3 Single Judge by way of a review petition for redressal of their grievance specifically on the ground of maintainability, which, according to them, goes to the very root of the matter. 4. Considering the limited prayer made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival submissions, the writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. It is clarified that if a review petition is filed before the learned Single Judge, the same shall be considered in accordance with law. 5. Accordingly, the instant writ appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu