Disposed¶24

Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC11 Jan 2024WPC/41/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

fish farming lease renewal; Sinchai jalashaya (tar) Ameri; Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh; WPC No. 41 of 2024; High Court of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur; Article 226 of the Constitution of India; Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi; motion stage disposal; 15 days fresh application; 30 days decision timeline; Collector Matsya Krushak Vikas Abhikaran Shakha Raigarh; CEO District Panchayat; CEO Janpad Panchayat Baramkela; Annexure P/1; 20.5.2013 lease grant.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to file fresh application for lease renewal within 15 days; respondent authorities/competent authority directed to consider and decide it within a further 30 days from filing; petition disposed of at motion stage. ¶24

Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Chhattisgarh HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WPC No. 41 of 2024

¶5

Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh Through President, Village Ameri, Tahsil Barmkela, District : Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, (Matsya Krushak Vikas Abhikaran Shakha), District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Chief Executive Officer District Panchayat, District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶10

Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Baramkela, District : Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Ms. Sareena Khan, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Aditya Bharadwaj, Panel Lawyer, on advance copy

¶13

Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order On Board

¶14

12.01.2024

¶15

1 . Heard.

¶16

2 . The petitioner has preferred instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following relief:-

¶17

“10.1 That this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and directed to respondents regarding consider in application filed by the petitioner for renewal of the lease for fish farming.

¶18

10.2 Any other relief(s) as the Hon’ble Court may be deemed to fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

¶19

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was granted lease for 10 years for fish farming in the Sinchai jalashaya (tar) Ameri on 20.5.2013 vide Annexure P/1.

¶20

¶21

After completion of the lease period, the petitioner has submitted application before the respondent authorities, but the same has not been renewed. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that she is ready to file fresh application for renewal of aforesaid lease and this petition may be disposed of directing respondent authorities to consider and decide application of the petitioner at the earliest.

¶22

4. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to allow the limited prayer of the petitioner.

¶23

5. Considering the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture, liberty is granted to the petitioner to file fresh application before respondent authorities/competent authority for redressal of its grievance with regard to renewal of aforesaid lease, within 15 days from today. Thereafter, it is directed that the respondent authorities/competent authority shall consider and decide the application of the petitioner, within further period of 30 days from the date of filing of the application.

¶24

6. With aforesaid observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of at the motion stage itself.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

(Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE

¶27

Bini

Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bajrang Swa Sahayta Samuh v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suritram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Kartik Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S. S.R. Hospital and Research Centre Vs the District Magistrate

M/S Rajendra Kumar Poddar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Dubey Goyal and Company Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Shivshakti Women Self Help Group Vs State of Chhattisgarh