Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/3469/2024 of GOPAL YADAV Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 21 September 2026
2026:CGHC:41336 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 3469 of 2024 1 - Gopal Yadav S/o Shri Purno Yadav Aged About 35 Years By Caste Mahkul, R/o Village Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary,
CGHC010223842024
2026:CGHC:41336
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 3469 of 2024
1 - Gopal Yadav S/o Shri Purno Yadav Aged About 35 Years By Caste Mahkul, R/o Village Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G.
... Petitioner(s)
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhhattisgarh.
2 - Sub -Divisional Officer (R), Lailunga, Tahsil -Lailunga, District Raigarh
C.G.
3 - Gram Panchayat Kilkila Through Its Secretary, Gram Panchayat Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G.
4 - Smt. Hema Kerketta W/o Shri Anil Kerketta, Aged About 36 Years Sarpanch Of Gram Panchayat Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G.
5 - Paitram S/o Shri Ramdular, Aged About 37 Years Occupation - Agriculturist, R/o Village Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G.
RUCHI
YADAV
Digitally
signed by
RUCHI
YADAV
6 - Rajoram Nagvanshi S/o Shri Vishvanath, By Caste Nagvanshi Aged About 39 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh C.G.
7 - Bhakturam S/o Shri Dhodhro, By Caste Oraon, Aged About 35 Years Occupation Agriculturist, R/o Village Kilkila, Tahsil Lailunga, District Raigarh
C.G.
... Respondent(s)
( Cause title taken from CIS Periphery)
For Petitioner(s)
: Mr. Amardeep Lahare, Advocate
For Respondent/State
: Mr. Anmol Sharma, Panel Lawyer
For Respondents No. 3 to
: Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate
SB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 22/09/2026
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. By way of the present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ by quashing the impugned order dated 03.06.2024 (Annexure P-1) passed by SDO(R) Lailunga for want of jurisdiction. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the respondent no. 2 to 4 which relates to issuance of tender and passing of the order impugned for kind perusal of this Hon'ble Court. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue to collect the fee for the weekly cattle market as per the terms and conditions of the tender/contract provided to him for the remaining period. 10.4 Any other relief as this Hon'ble Court may deems fit looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may also be awarded.”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in view of the subsequent developments, the instant petition has become infructuous and, therefore, he does not want to press the same.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that he has no objection to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
4. In view of the aforesaid submission, the instant petition has become infructuous and is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ruchi