1 / 2 2026:CGHC:15785 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3048 of 2026 Shekhar Nirmalkar S/o Shri Birsingh Nirmalkar Aged About 40 Years R/o In Front Of Pree Matrik Girls Hostel Konkadi Balodabazar Tahsil Balodabazar District Balodabzr-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary And Commissioner Excise, Commercial Tax (Excise) Department Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Managing Director C S M C L Raipur Distt. Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Deputy Commissioner Divisional Flying Squad, Raipur Division Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - The Collector Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapra Chhattisgarh 5 - District Manager C S M C L Balodabazar, District Balodabazar-Bhatapara Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioners : Mr. Dushyant Dayal, Advocate For Respondent-State : Ms. Anuja Sharma, Dy. G.A. HON'BLE SHRI PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, JUDGE ORDER ON BOARD 07.04.2026 1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs: “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to consider the representation made by the petitioner and removed the name of the petitioner in the blacklist in pursuance 2 / 2 of the recommendation dated 10.01.2024 issued by respondent no. 5 in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case including cost of the petition, may also be granted 10.3 Any other relief, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be allowed.” 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working in the country liquor shop, Indiranagar Bhatapara. Petitioner, based on some enquiry conducted by the Collector was removed from service and subsequently is blacklisted without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Petitioner had submitted representation before respondent No. 4 on 14.01.2026, which is pending consideration, therefore, direction be issued to consider the representation of the petitioner, at the earliest, within specified time frame. 3. Counsel for the State submits that in view of the limited prayer made by counsel for the petitioners, he is having no objection. 4. On due consideration of submission of counsel for the parties, without entering into merits of the case, writ petition at this stage is disposed of directing respondent No. 4 to consider and take decision on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 14.01.2026, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the Order. 5. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Saurabh JUDGE