1 CGHC010407302022 2026:CGHC:29906 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5731 of 2022 1 - Rewaram Nirmalkar S/o. Late Pusao Ram, Aged About 50 Years R/o. Village Bhanpur, Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Praduman Lal S/o. Parasram, Aged About 42 Years R/o. Village Bhanpur, Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 3 - Govind Ram S/o. Late Teturam Sen, Aged About 70 Years R/o. Village Bhanpur, Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. 4 - Rekhchand S/o. Chabilal, Aged About 25 Years R/o. Village Bhanpur, Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Collector, Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 3 - Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon Through Its Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 4 - Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Through Its Secretary, Gram Panchayat Bhanpuri, Janpad Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 For Petitioner :- Ms. A. Sandhya Rao, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Varunendra Mishra, Advocate For Respondents No. 3 & 4 :- Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate For State :- Mr. S.S. Choubey, G.A. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 15.07.2026 1. Following reliefs have been prayed in this petition:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent no. 4 to expeditiously decide the objections raised by the petitioners and consider their application for allotment of shops and publish final list of allotment in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit by granted.” 2. By way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ directing respondent No. 4 to expeditiously decide the objections preferred by the petitioners against the provisional allotment list of shops and thereafter consider their candidature for allotment of shops by publishing the final allotment list in accordance with law. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that respondent No. 4 issued a notice dated 13.05.2022 inviting applications for allotment of shops situated at Bazaar Chowk and 3 G.E. Road, Village Bhanpuri. It is submitted that the said notice specifically provided that preference in allotment would be accorded to persons belonging to the BPL category, differently- abled persons, women, Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, Self-Help Groups, educated unemployed persons and rehabilitated Pauni Pasari traders. It is further submitted that the petitioners, who are engaged in traditional occupations such as barbering and other similar professions, submitted their applications for allotment of shops in terms of the aforesaid notice and fulfilled the eligibility conditions prescribed therein. Learned counsel further submits that on 03.10.2022, respondent No. 4 published a provisional list of selected allottees and invited objections thereto. Since the petitioners' names were not included in the said list, they submitted detailed objections questioning the provisional allotment and pointing out that several selected persons were already in possession of shops and, therefore, were not entitled to preference. It is submitted that respondent No. 4, by communication dated 14.10.2022, fixed 21.10.2022 for hearing the objections and directed the petitioners to appear in person. The petitioners duly appeared on the scheduled date; however, no hearing was conducted and the matter was adjourned without assigning any reason or fixing any further date. Learned counsel submits that despite lapse of considerable time, the objections submitted by the petitioners have neither been decided nor has the final allotment list been published. It is contended that the 4 inaction on the part of respondent No. 4 is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of the principles of natural justice. It is further contended that the respondents have failed to adhere to the criteria prescribed in the notice dated 13.05.2022 and have proceeded to favour persons who are already possessing shops, while ignoring the claims of the petitioners, who belong to the categories entitled to preferential consideration. Such action, according to the petitioners, is unfair, discriminatory and suffers from arbitrariness. On the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel prays that respondent No. 4 be directed to decide the objections preferred by the petitioners within a stipulated period and thereafter finalize the allotment process strictly in accordance with the terms of the notification and applicable law. 4. Learned State counsel submits that the grievance raised in the present petition is essentially against respondent No. 4–Gram Panchayat, Bhanpuri, which issued the notice inviting applications for allotment of shops and published the provisional list of allottees. It is submitted that the Gram Panchayat is a separate legal entity competent to defend its action and has already filed its reply before this Court. It is further submitted that no specific allegation has been levelled against the State authorities and no substantive relief has been sought against the answering respondents. In such circumstances, no cause of action survives against the State and, therefore, the writ petition, so far as the State respondents are concerned, deserves to be dismissed. 5 5. Learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 submits that the allotment process was conducted strictly in accordance with Section 65 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 and the Chhattisgarh Panchayat (Sthawar Sampati Ka Antaran) Niyam, 1994. It is submitted that after publication of the provisional list, the objections preferred by the petitioners were duly considered and rejected in the meeting held on 21.10.2022, whereafter the final allotment list was approved and published. It is further submitted that the allotment process has already been concluded and agreements have been executed in favour of the successful allottees, who have not been impleaded as parties to the present petition. Accordingly, it is contended that the petition has become infructuous and, in any event, is liable to be dismissed for non-joinder of necessary parties. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 7. The principal grievance raised by the petitioners in the present writ petition is confined to the prayer contained in relief clause 10.1, whereby a direction has been sought for expeditious consideration and decision of the objections preferred by them and for consideration of their applications for allotment of shops. Considering the limited nature of the relief sought and without entering into the merits of the rival submissions advanced by the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the ends of justice would 6 be served if respondent No. 4 is directed to consider and decide the grievance of the petitioners, if the same still survives, by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law. 8. Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent No. 4 to consider and decide the objections/grievance raised by the petitioners, as reflected in relief clause 10.1 of the writ petition, strictly in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned order, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 9. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claims of the parties and respondent No. 4 shall take an independent decision uninfluenced by any observation made in this order. 10.With the aforesaid observation and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. 11.No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha