Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 31111 (CHH)

SMT. PUNITA YADAV v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WA/690/2026 · 2026-08-11

Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal

Review Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010262902026 2026:CGHC:35473-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 690 of 2026 1 - Smt. Punita Yadav W/o Indrajeet Yadav Aged About 25 Years R/o Village- Samundiri, Post- Kothali, Tahsil- Shankargarh, Distt.- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Department Of Women And Child Development, Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atalnagar, Nava Raipur, Distt.- Raipur, C.G. 2 - The Collector District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. 3 - The Project Officer Integrated Child Development Project- Shankargarh, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. 4 - Janpad Panchayat- Shankargarh Through Its Chief Executive Officer- Shankargarh, District- Balrampur-Ramanujganj, C.G. 5 - Smt. Mulari Yadav W/o Badri Prasad Yadav Aged About 56 Years R/o Ward No. 16, Village- Kothali, Tahsil- Shankargarh, District- Balrampur- Ramanujganj, C.G. ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For State : Shri Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Justice Ramesh Sinha, CJ Hon’ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, J Judgment on Board 12.08.2026 Per, Ramesh Sinha, CJ. 1 The present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 12.02.2026 passed by learned Single Judge in WPS No.4181 of 2023. 2 Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the writ appellant was not a party in the writ petition and an adverse order has been INDRAJEET SAHU Digitally signed by INDRAJEET SAHU Date: 2026.08.12 18:28:53 +0530 2 passed against the appellant without impleading her as party respondent, and therefore, she may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with liberty to file a Review Petition before the learned Single Judge. 3 Prayer is not opposed by the State counsel. 4 Accordingly, the present writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. No order asto costs. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice inder