1 CGHC010204862026 2026:CGHC:34372-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 629 of 2026 1 - Dilendra Yadav S/o Late D.D. Yadav Aged About 42 Years President Of Titiksha Shanti Nagar Punarvas Samiti, R/o H. No. 35, Shanti Nagar, B A L C O, District Korba, C.G. 2 - Govind Sharma S/o Gopal Sharma Aged About 32 Years President Titiksha Samajik Sangathan, Ward No. 35, House No. 33/89, Shanti Nagar Balco, District- Korba Chhattisgarh. ... Appellant versus 1 - Bharat Aluminum Company Limited Korba, District- Korba Chhattisgarh. Through Its Director, Balco Nagar, Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Additional Collector Korba, At Collectorate, Korba, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent For Appellants : Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, Senior Advocate through video conferencing assisted by Ms. Astha Patel, Advocate For Respondent No.1/Balco : Mr. Abhishek Sinha, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ghanshaym Patel, Advocate For Respondent No. 2/State : Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice 06 . 08 .202 6 1. Heard Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned Senior Advocate (appearing through video conferencing) assisted by Ms. Astha Patel, learned counsel for the appellants. Also heard Mr. Abhishek Sinha, ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA Digitally signed by ROHIT KUMAR CHANDRA 2 learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No.1/Balco and Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, learned Government Advocate, appearing for the State/respondent No.2. 2. Though Mr. Ghanshyam Patel is on adjustment today, but since the present matter has been listed in Special Bench, he is present to along with Mr. Abhishek Sinha, learned Senior Advocate to argue the matter. 3. This writ appeal is presented against an interlocutory order dated 24.04.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 6577 of 2025. 4. At the outset, Mr. Abhishek Sinha, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for respondent / Balco submits that the present appeal is not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Section 2 (1) of the Chhattisgarh High Court (Appeal to Division Bench) Act, 2006, for short, the Act of 2006, which specifically provides that no appeal shall lie against an interlocutory order. He further submits that the appellants have already moved an application before the learned Single Judge for modification of the impugned order, which pending for consideration. 5. Ms. Hamida Siddiqui, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellants tried to justify the filing of the present appeal arguing that the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge amounts to passing of the final order. 3 6. Having heard submissions of learned Senior Advocates, appearing for the respective parties and perusing the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge, we find that the submission made by the learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellants has no substance and is wholly unfounded. 7. In view of the above, the instant appeal is dismissed as not maintainable leaving it open to the appellants to press the application, which was filed by them for modification of the impugned order before this learned Single. Sd/- Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Chandra