1 2026:CGHC:3171-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 31 of 2026 The Municipal Corporation Risali District Durg, Chhattisgarh, Through The Commissioner, The Municipal Corporation Risali, Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh ... Appellant(s) versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department of Urban Administration And Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Post Office Mantralaya, P.S. Rakhi, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. The Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh, Through The Commissioner, The Municipal Corporation Bhilai, District Durg Chhattisgarh 3. The Additional Commissioner Municipal Corporation Bhilai District Durg, Chhattisgarh 4. Shatrughan Lal Nayak S/o Chowa Ram Nayak Aged About 61 Years R/o Village Pander, Post Office And Tahsil Patan District Durg Chhattisgarh ...Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) BRIJMOHAN MORLE Digitally signed by BRIJMOHAN MORLE Date: 2026.01.20 17:51:42 +0530 2 For Appellant : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate. For Respondent/State : Mr. S.S. Baghel, Government Advocate. For Respondent No. 2 : Ms. Juhi Anguriya, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Advocate. Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal , Judge Judgment on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 20 .01.2026 1. Heard Mr. N. Naha Roy, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. S.S. Baghel, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State, and Ms. Juhi Anguriya, learned counsel holding the brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2. 2. The present intra-court appeal has been preferred by the appellant/respondent No. 3 assailing the order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPS No. 3057 of 2023 (Shatrughan Lal Nayak v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner/respondent No. 4 herein was allowed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the present appeal with liberty to file a review petition before the learned Single Judge. 3 4. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 raise no objection to the said prayer. 5. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the appellant, the present writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty, as prayed for. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Brijmohan