Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 32983 (CHH)

HIMANSHU RAGDE v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/6060/2026 · 2026-08-10

Shri Bibhu Datta Guru

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 CGHC010305332026 2026:CGHC:35257 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6060 of 2026 1 - Himanshu Ragde S/o Late Ganesh Ragde Aged About 32 Years R/o Ward No. 12, House No. 272, Station Para, Rajnandgaon, District- Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Municipal Corporation, Through Commissioner, Rajnandgaon District- Rajnandgaon , Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner, Municipal Corporation Rajnandgaon District- Rajnandgaon , Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Saket Pandey, Advocate. For State : Mr. Hariom Rai, Panel Lawyer. For Respondents/Municipal Corporation : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board 11/08/2026 1. By the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1.That, the records pertaining to the case of the AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Digitally signed by AMARDEEP CHOUBEY Date: 2026.08.12 18:14:48 +0530 2 petitioner, may be kindly called for the kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly direct the respondent authorities to decide the representations / applications of the petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment, in the interest of justice. 10.3 That any other relief which this Hon'ble court may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that at this stage, petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and only seeking a direction towards the respondents authorities to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment. 3. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for respondents No.2 and 3 opposes the submission of learned counsel for petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. As petitioner has already submitted representation and according to him, representation was not considered and decided, therefore, I find it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition at this stage directing respondents No.2 and 3 to take decision on the representation submitted by petitioner in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 3 6. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with aforesaid observations and directions. SD/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) Judge Amardeep