1 CGHC010312562026 2026:CGHC:35861 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4198 of 2026 Ghasnin Bai Gond Wife Of Kanhaiya Lal Gond Aged About 50 Years Resident Of Gram Panchayat Markam Godhi, Village Gadgodhi, Tahsil Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bahwan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Officer Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.), 4 - Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Sakti, District Sakti (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate For State : Mr. Shreyansh Mehta, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 13.08.2026 1. By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner does not challenge any specific order, but seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondent authorities, YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2026.08.13 17:57:00 +0530 2 particularly respondent No. 2, to consider and decide the representation dated 23-02-2026 (Annexure P-7) in a time-bound manner, and to disburse the balance sanctioned amount of ₹3.90 lakhs along with interest for the construction work of Samudayik Bhawan at Gram Panchayat Markam Godhi, which stands duly completed. The petitioner has prayed for following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 23-02-2026 and direct to pay the remaining amount of Rs.3.90 lakhs to the petitioner with interest within stipulated time period. 10.2 Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners, which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was the former Sarpanch (ex-Sarpanch) of Gram Panchayat Markam Godhi. During his tenure, a work order dated 23-05-2022 was issued from the office of respondent No. 2 for the construction of Samudayik Bhawan with an allocated outlay of ₹6.50 lakhs, followed by an agreement (Annexure P-2) and subsequent order dated 24-06-2022 (Annexure P-3). An initial installment of ₹2.60 lakhs was released on 07-07-2022 (Annexure P-4). Though the petitioner successfully completed the construction work in all respects—duly certified via completion memo dated 20-05-2025 3 (Annexure P-5)—the remaining balance installment of ₹3.90 lakhs has deliberately been withheld without any fault on the petitioner's part. Therefore, a direction be issued to the concerned authorities to release the remaining payment expeditiously. 3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that vide memo dated 24-06-2025, the Collector, District Sakti has already forwarded the matter to the Collector, District Janjgir-Champa (under whose territorial jurisdiction the area formerly fell) for necessary disbursement in accordance with the law. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. Considering the matter in its entirety and upon perusal of the record, it appears that the construction work of Samudayik Bhawan has already been completed in terms of the work order and certified as such by the authorities. The only remaining action is the formal disbursement of the remaining balance of ₹3.90 lakhs, either by the Collector, Sakti or the Collector, Janjgir- Champa. 6. Accordingly, the petitioner is granted liberty to submit a fresh, comprehensive representation/application along with a certified copy of this order before the Collector, District Janjgir-Champa within 15 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation/application, the Collector, District Janjgir-Champa, in coordination with the 4 Collector, District Sakti, shall consider and decide the petitioner's claim regarding the disbursement of the balance amount in accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a further period of 45 days. 7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/-- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh