Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 8916 (CHH)

MAHILA SANTOSHI SWA-SAHAYTA SAMUH ICHOLI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/5398/2021 · 2026-04-01

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:15224 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 5398 of 2021 1 - Mahila Santoshi Swa-Sahayta Samuh Icholi Bedekona Through Its President Folo Bai Wd/o Late Basant Ram, Aged About 48 Years R/o Village Icholi, Tahsil Sanna, P. S. Sanna, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Food Inspector Bagicha/sanna, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bagicha, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Sarpanch Gram Panchayat, Bedekona, P. S. Sanna, District Jashpur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Parwati Suryawanshi, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Bhupendra Singh, Advocate. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/04/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the records regarding to the case of petitioner for its kind perusal. 10.2 That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order/decision of respondent no.2 dated 01.12.2021 and direct the respondents to not disturb the petitioner to serve his responsibility and restrain the respondents to comply the work and operation of said impugned order/decision. 10.3 Cost of petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 10.4 Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition with liberty to avail alternative remedy available under the law. 3. No objection has been raised from other side. 4. Accordingly, the prayer is allowed and the instant petition is 3 dismissed as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat