Remanded

Afsana v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC14 Dec 2021WPS/6879/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur allowed a writ petition challenging a non-speaking order rejecting interim relief. The order dated 09.11.2021 passed by Respondent No.2/ Commissioner, Revenue Division Surguja was set aside and the matter remitted to the Commissioner to consider the application afresh.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 09.11.2021 was set aside and the matter was remitted to the Commissioner to consider the interim application.

Afsana Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Public Procurement and Tenders | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

¶1

NAFR

¶2

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶3

WPS No. 6879 of 2021

¶4

Afsana D/o Mohammad Naim Aged About 27 Years Caste Musalman, R/o Village Badwar, Tehsil Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayatraj, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶8

The Revenue Divisional Commissioner Surguja Ambikapur Division, District Surguja Chhattisgarh

¶9

Collector Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶10

The Porject Officer Integrated Child Development Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶11

The Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶12

Nagma Khatun W/o Nesar Ahmad Aged About 25 Years Caste Musalman, R/o Badwar, Tehsil Pratappur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh

¶13

---- Respondents

¶14

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Yadav, Advocate Respondents : Mr. Suyas Dhar, PL

¶15

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board

¶16

14.12.2021

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the application for interim relief has been rejected by the Respondent No.2/ Commissioner, Revenue Division Surguja District Ambikapur on 09.11.2021 by non-speaking and unreasoned order, which is

¶18

unsustainable and bad in law.

¶19

On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the prayer of the petitioner.

¶20

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered the rival submissions made hereinabove and also gone through the record with utmost circumspection.

¶21

Since the impugned order has been passed by non-speaking and unreasoned order, the impugned order dated 09.11.2021 (Annexure P/1) passed by Respondent No.2/ Commissioner, Revenue Division Surguja District Ambikapur is set aside. The matter is remitted to Respondent No.2/ Commissioner, Revenue Division Surguja District Ambikapur to consider the interim application preferred by the petitioner afresh in accordance with law.

¶22

With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition finally stand disposed of.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

(Sanjay K. Agrawal )

¶25

Judge

¶26

Santosh

Afsana v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afsana v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shailendra Kumar Mathur Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Rishi Kumar Sao Vs Managing Director, Chhattisgarh Rajya Anryavasayee Sahkari Vitt Evam Vikas Nigam Raipur

Ashwani Kumar Patkar Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Firat Ram Kurmi Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Parmanand Yadav Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Rajendra Prasad Kaushik Vs State of Chhattisgarh