1 CGHC010299422026 2026:CGHC:35840 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4046 of 2026 1 - Vikram Sen S/o Rajkumar Sen Aged About 45 Years R/o Ward No. 15, Kumharras Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Commissioner, Mahatama Gandhi Rastriya Gramin Rojgar Guarantee Parishad Vikas Bhavan 3rd Floor Sector- 19, North Block Nawa Raipur Atal Nagar Raipur District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Collector Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) 4 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) 5 - Deputy Director Agriculture / Construction Agency Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) 6 - Agriculture Development Officer/ Soil Conservation Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) 7 - Assistant Soil Conservation Officer / Supervisor Cum Care Taker Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) 8 - Surveyor, Posted At Office Of Assistant Soil Conservation Officer Sukma District- Sukma (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. F.S. Khare, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 13/08/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to issue a an order/direction to respondents to forthwith pay the entire bill amount Rs. 3,20,666.29/- to petitioner. 10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to order/direct to pay the interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the delay caused by respondents. 10.3 This Hon'ble court may kindly be call for the records for its kind perusal which relates to petitioner's matter. 10.4 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not challenging any particular order but is seeking a direction from this Court to the concerned respondent authorities, to decide the representation dated 15.4.2026 within a time frame fixed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for petitioner seeking direction to the concerned respondent authorities to consider the pending representation, he is having no objection to the limited 3 prayer. His pending representation will be considered in accordance with law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the concerned respondent authorities to consider/decide the representation of the petitioner dated 15.4.2026 in accordance with law/rules/regulations and in an objective manner as expeditiously as possible within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat