1 2026:CGHC:20167 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1968 of 2021 1 - Machhuwa Vikas Samiti Through Its President, Ramkhilawan Kenwat, S/o Latel Ram Kenwat, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Betari, Malhar, Block Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Fisheries Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director, Directorate, Fisheries Department, Indirawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Collector, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Deputy Director, Fisheries, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 5 - Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Jaitpur, Block Masturi, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh --- Respondent(s) VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 WPC No. 1098 of 2025 1 - Machhuwa Vikas Samiti, Through Its President, Ramkhilawan Kenwat, S/o Latel Ram Kenwat, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Betari, Malhar, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Fisheries Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director, Directorate, Fisheries Department, Indrawati Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Commissioner, Bilaspur Division, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Collector, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5 - Deputy Director, Fisheries, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Jaitpur, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Betari Jaitpur Machhuwa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Gram Panchayat, Jaitpur, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) 8 - Jitendra Dhritlahare, S/o Shri Kalaram Dhritlahare, Aged About 42 Years Secretary, Betari Jaitpur Machhuwa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Ashrit Gram Betari, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners :- Mr. C.J.K. Rao, Advocate For State :- Mr. Shobhit Mishra, Dy. G.A. For respective respondents :- Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Mr. Vivek Bhakta & Mr. Sahdev Yadav, Advocates ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 30.04.2026 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that an alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under the law. It is 3 further submitted that the petitioner may be permitted to avail the said alternative remedy and the present petition may be disposed of with a direction to approach the competent authority by filing an appropriate revision petition as envisaged under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable in view of availability of an efficacious alternative remedy under the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. It is contended that the petitioner has an adequate statutory remedy by way of revision before the competent authority and, therefore, this Court may not entertain the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, this Court finds that an efficacious alternative remedy is available to the petitioner under the provisions of the Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam. It is well settled that when a statutory remedy is available, this Court would ordinarily refrain from exercising its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. In the present case, learned counsel for the petitioner has also fairly submitted that the petitioner intends to avail the alternative remedy available under law. In view of the same, this Court deems it appropriate to dispose of the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate revision petition before the competent authority in accordance with law. 4 5. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to file an appropriate revision petition on or before 11.05.2026. Till filing of the revision petition, i.e., up to 11.05.2026, there shall be an order of status quo as it exists today. 6. With the aforesaid liberty and direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. 7. No order as to costs. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha