Dismissed¶24

Satyanarayan Sharma v. Registrar

Chhattisgarh HC24 Jul 2025WPC/3632/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

WPC No. 3632 of 2025; Satyanarayan Sharma v. Registrar, Public Trust-Cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Raipur; premature writ petition; maintainability at premature stage; appointment of new trustee; public trust; invitation for applications; order dated 30.05.2025 (Annexure P-1); judgment and decree dated 20.02.2018; High Court order dated 08.05.2025; writ petition dismissed; High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur; Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge; decided 25/07/2025.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is too premature and not maintainable at this stage, because the respondent has only issued an invitation for appointment of a new trustee and no adverse order has been passed against the petitioner. ¶23

Satyanarayan Sharma Vs Registrar — Chhattisgarh HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

2025:CGHC:36032

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

¶5

WPC No. 3632 of 2025

¶6

1 - Satyanarayan Sharma S/o Jagdish Aged About 84 Years Resident Bans Tall Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶7

---- Petitioner(s)

¶8

versus

¶9

1 - Registrar, Public Trust-Cum-Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), G.E. Road, Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶10

----Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Nupur Trivedi, P.L.

¶11

Hon’ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board

¶12

25/07/2025

¶13

1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.

¶14

2. The present writ petition has been filed seeking following relief(s);-

¶15

(I) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 30.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) and direction may kindly be issued to the respondent to first to call for the meeting of the existing Trustee (the petitioner herein) and thereafter the name of new name may be considered along with the petitioner.

¶16

(ii) Any appropriate writ, direction or order may also kindly be passed in favour of the petitioners, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit

¶17

Digitally signed by JYOTI JHA Date: 2025.07.28 11:37:07 +0530

¶18

¶19

in the circumstances of the case.

¶20

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is challenging the proceeding initiated by the respondent, whereby the order dated 30.05.2025 (Annexure P-1) has been passed for appointment of new trustee for which the invitation has been called for the application for appointment of new trustee contrary to the judgment and decree dated 20.02.2018 and also against the order dated 08.05.2025 passed by the High Court, therefore he prays for quashment of the impugned order dated 30.05.2025.

¶21

4. Learned counsel for respondents opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the present writ petition is not maintainable at the premature stage.

¶22

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶23

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court has no hesitation in holding that, the present Writ Petition is too pre-mature at this stage as the respondent has only invited invitation for appointment of new trustee and there is also no adverse order passed against the petitioner, therefore the present writ petition is not maintainable at the pre-mature stage.

¶24

7. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands dismissed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

( Arvind Kumar Verma ) Judge

¶27

Jyoti

Satyanarayan Sharma v. Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyanarayan Sharma v. Registrar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Purva Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Bisahulal Dubey Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Maheshwar Kumar Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Purandar Promoters and Developers Private Limited, Vs Chhattisgarh Real Estate Regulatory Aurhtority

Om Prakash Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Gorelal Chandra Vs State of Chhattisgarh