Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3919 (CHH)

SURYAKANT BHOI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/6612/2025 · 2026-04-06

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:15797 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6612 of 2025 1 - Suryakant Bhoi S/o Late Digrilal Bhoi Aged About 60 Years R/o Ward No. 54, Shradha Vihar Colony, In Front Of Sharma Sounds, Boriyakhur, Raipur, District Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Backward Classes Commission, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Chowk, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Aditi Joshi, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sahil Singh, Panel Lawyer S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 07.04.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking for following reliefs:- “a) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner sympathetically and in accordance with law, in light of his long and uninterrupted service of over 11 years as a daily wage Chowkidar with the Chhattisgarh State Backward Classes Commission. b) Issue an appropriate writ, order, or direction to the respondents to pass a reasoned and ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA Date: 2026.04.09 11:11:03 +0530 2 speaking order on the petitioner's representation dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure P-1), within a time-bound period. c) Issue such other writ(s), order(s), or direction(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the interest of justice, equity, and good conscience.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at this stage petitioner is not pressing this petition on merits and she is only seeking a direction to respondent No.1 to consider and take decision on the pending representation submitted by the petitioner dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure P/1) at the earliest within the specific time frame as fixed by this Court. 3. Learned State counsel does not oppose the limited prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents available on record. 5. On due consideration of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this petition is disposed of directing the respondent No.1 to take a decision on pending representation of petitioner dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure P/1) 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 observation and direction. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/-Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Saxena