Chhattisgarh High Court
MCC/879/2026 of ANUPDAS KURRE Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 17 September 2026
2026:CGHC:40728 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 879 of 2026 Anupdas Kurre S/o Shri Kashiram Kurre Aged About 31 Years Presently Working As Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Bhaskra R/o Village Bhaskra P.S. And Tahsil Lormi Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Applicant versus 1 -
CGHC010358132026
2026:CGHC:40728
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
MCC No. 879 of 2026
Anupdas Kurre S/o Shri Kashiram Kurre Aged About 31 Years Presently Working As Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Bhaskra R/o Village Bhaskra P.S. And Tahsil Lormi Distt. Mungeli Chhattisgarh
... Applicant
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 4 - The Tahsildar/ Election Officer Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh 5 - Shri Ramesh Tonde S/o Shri Bulkhu Tonde Aged About 51 Years R/o Village Bhaskra P.S. And Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicants
(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)
For Applicant
: Mr. Avadhesh Mishra, Advocate
For State
: Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer For Respective respondents : Mr. Vimal Pathak, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Devershi Thakur, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 18.09.2026
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. This MCC has been preferred by the applicant seeking restoration of WPC No.6573/2025. The said writ petition came to be dismissed for want of prosecution by order dated 02.09.2026 as neither the applicant nor counsel appeared when the matter was called for hearing. The applicant has explained the circumstances which led to the non-appearance on the said date and has prayed for restoration of the writ petition to its original file.
2. Upon due consideration of the grounds urged in the application and being satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown for the applicant’s non-appearance, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice require that the writ petition be restored.
3. Accordingly, the MCC is allowed. Resultantly, WPC No.6573/2025 is restored to its original number subject to deposit of costs of Rs.2,000/- payable to the High Court Bar Association Library Fund.
Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge Yogesh