Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/1628/2020 of M/S GREAT INDIA TOBACCO CO. Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 13 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44401-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1628 of 2020 1 - M/s Great India Tobacco Co. A Registered Partnership Firm Represented Through Its Partner Abhijit Paul, Having Its Registered Office At 11 Rupchand Roy Street Kolkata 700007, District : Kolkata, West
CGHC010163772020
2026:CGHC:44401-DB
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1628 of 2020
1 - M/s Great India Tobacco Co. A Registered Partnership Firm Represented Through Its Partner Abhijit Paul, Having Its Registered Office At 11 Rupchand Roy Street Kolkata 700007, District : Kolkata, West Bengal 2 - Abhijit Paul M/s. Great India Tobacco Co, A Registered Partnership Firm Residing At (Cf 124, Saltlake City, Sector-1, Kolkata 700064) And Working For Gain At 11, Rupchand Roy Street Kolkata 700007, District :
Kolkata, West Bengal
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading And Development) Co-Operative Federation Ltd Having Its Office At Van Dhan Bhavan, Sector-24, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - The Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading And Development) Co-Operative Federation Ltd Having Its Office At Van Dhan Bhavan, Sector-24, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
4 - The Additional Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading And Development) Co-Operative Federation Ltd Having Its Office At Van Dhan Bhavan, Sector-24, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5 - The Executive Director (Trade And Development) Chhattisgarh State Minor Forest Produce (Trading And Development) Co-Operative Federation Ltd Having Its Office At Van Dhan Bhavan, Sector-24, Atal Nagar, Nava Raipur Chhattisgarh, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Shayon Kar, Advocate
For Respondent(s) :
Ms. Anuja Sharma, Deputy Government
Advocate and Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Krushna Ram Mohapatra, Chief Justice
Hon'ble Shri Santosh Sharma, Judge
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
on Board
Per
Krushna Ram Mohapatra
, Chief Justice
14.10.2026
1. Heard Mr. Shayon Kar on behalf of Mr. Palash Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Anuja Sharma, learned Deputy Government Advocate for respondent No.1/State as well as Mr. Syed Majid Ali, learned counsel for respondents No.2 to 4.
2. The writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:- “(a) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the order dated 27.5.2020 (Annexure-P/3) passed by the Respondent authorities in the interest of justice.
(b) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue awrit in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents authorities to immediately refund the Earnest Money Deposit amounting to Rs. 26,25,047/- paid by your petitioner,
(c) That, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to a writ in the nature of Certiorari calling upon the respondents to transmit to this Hon'ble Court the entire records of the case so that conscionable justice may be administered to the parties therein; (d) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit be granted in the interest of justice.”
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that, in spite of repeated communications, there is no response from the petitioners. Hence, he does not want to press the writ petition.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents/Federation submits that the writ petition has become academic, as the period of blacklisting, i.e., three years, has elapsed in the meantime from the date of the impugned order dated 27.05.2020 (Annexure P/3). Since the main relief sought in the writ petition was for setting aside the order of blacklisting dated 27.05.2020, the writ petition has become infructuous, and the petitioners may, therefore, not be interested in pursuing the matter.
5. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of as not pressed. Sd/- Sd/- (Santosh Sharma) (Krushna Ram Mohapatra) Judge Chief Justice Manpreet