Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/1836/2021 of PATRAKHAN LAL, Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH, on 25 September 2026
2026:CGHC:41909 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1836 of 2021 1 - Patrakhan Lal, S/o Late Shri Bisheshar Das, Aged About 75 Years R/o Main Road, Zora, Post Office - Krishak Nagar, Village - Zora, Raipur, Tehsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur,
CGHC010095152021
2026:CGHC:41909
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1836 of 2021
1 - Patrakhan Lal, S/o Late Shri Bisheshar Das, Aged About 75 Years R/o Main Road, Zora, Post Office - Krishak Nagar, Village - Zora, Raipur, Tehsil And District - Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh, Through, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
3 - The Tehsildar, Tehsildar Office, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District :
Raipur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
(Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.)
For Petitioner
: None.
For State
: Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, P.L.
For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Sandeep Dubey, Advocate.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 26.09.2026
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.
1. On the last date of hearing i.e., 29.07.2026 and even today, despite the matter being called twice, no one appears on behalf of the petitioner, nor is there any representation on his behalf. In view of the repeated absence and lack of representation, it appears that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the present petition any further.
2. In the absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioner, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution.
3. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju