1 CGHC010289612026 2026:CGHC:36718-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPPIL No. 47 of 2026 Amit Kumar Chandrakar S/o Devkumar Chandrakar Aged About 44 Years R/o Makan No. 96, Ward No. 06, Seonikala, Kurmi Para, Village- Seonikala, Tahsil- Kurud, District- Dhamtari (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Revenue And Disaster Management, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner Raipur Division, Office Of The Commissioner, Raipur Division, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Collector District- Dhamtari Office Of The Collector District Dhamtari (C.G.) 4. The Sub Divisional Officer Kurud District- Dhamtari Office Of The S.D.O. Behind Tahsil Office Kurud, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 5. The Tahsildar Tahsil Kurud, District- Dhamtari Office Of The Tahsildar, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 6. The Revenue Inspector R.I. Circle Nari, Tahsil Kurud, District- Dhamtari Office Of The Revenue Inspector Nari, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 7. The Patwari Village Seonokala, Tahsil Kurud, District- Dhamtari Office Of The Patwari, Village Seonokala, Tahsil Kurud, District Dhamtari (C.G.) BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.08.18 15:08:13 +0530 2 8. National Highway Authority Of India Through Its Regional Officer Raipur, Regional Office Raipur, A-7, Vip Estate, Shankar Nagar Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Abhinav Tiwari, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. Praveen Das, Additional Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 18 .08.2026 1. Heard Mr. Abhinav Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Praveen Das, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State. 2. The present writ petition styled as ‘Public Interest Litigation’ has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayers: “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to order a fresh inquiry of the fraudulent/inappropriate disbursement of compensation of village seonikala by an independent agency or authority. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to order to initiate departmental proceedings against the erring official and recover the excess amount paid as compensation. 3 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. In the present petition, the petitioner has not deposited the requisite security amount as required under the applicable rules. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the non- deposit of the requisite security amount, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw the present petition with liberty to deposit the said amount and thereafter avail the appropriate remedy by filing a fresh petition in accordance with law. 4. In view of the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after depositing the requisite security amount in accordance with the applicable rules. It is made clear that the petitioner shall be at liberty to raise all such grounds as may be available to him in accordance with law in the fresh petition. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan