WPC/4692/2026 of ARCHANA BAI Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 15 September 2026

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary Health Department Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, Tahsil And District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh,

2. The Collector Korba Collectorate Korba District- Korba Chhattisgarh,

3. The Station House Officer Police Station Urga, District- Korba Chhattisgarh,

4. The Gram Panchayat Dadarkala Through The Secretary Gram Panchayat Dadarkala Village Dadarkala Block- Kartala District- Korba Chhattisgarh,

... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. Prakhar Deshore, Advocate For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice

Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Order on Board 16/09/2026

1. The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, has prayed for the following reliefs:- “10.1 This this Hon'ble Court may further be pleased to direct the Respondents to grant/pay compensation of with the interest to the petitioner for the unfortunate death of her minor son, aged about 10 years, who died due to severe injuries caused by rabid stray dog bite, in view of the law laid down and directions issued by this Hon'ble Court in similarly situated cases, in the interest of justice. 10.2 This Hon’ble Court may further be pleased to pass an appropriate order or issue writ as deemed fit under the facts and circumstances of the case”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the minor son of the petitioner died on account of injuries sustained due to dog bites. He submits that in view of the orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPPIL No.24/2017 dated 26.09.2018 and by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in WPC No.1856/2018 dated 10.10.2018, the petitioner is entitled to compensation in accordance with the directions issued therein. He would further submit that the petitioner had earlier approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.4185/2024, wherein this Court, vide order dated 17.02.2025, directed the concerned authority to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of 45 days. However, despite the said direction, the representation of the petitioner has not been decided till date.

3. Learned State counsel prays for time to file reply to the petition. However, he could not dispute that the application/representation of the petitioner has not yet been decided and the same is pending for consideration for more than one year.

4. Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the record, particularly the post-mortem report and other relevant documents, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to compensation in terms of the orders passed by this Court in WPPIL No.24/2017 and WPC No.1856/2018.

5. Accordingly, the concerned authority is directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation, in accordance with law and in the light of the aforesaid orders, by passing an appropriate order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The respondent authorities shall consider and decide the representation filed by the petitioner strictly in accordance with law on its own merits.

6. The concerned authority shall file a compliance report, along with an affidavit, before the Registrar (Judicial) within a period of 30 days from the date of passing of the appropriate order.

7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)

Judge

Priyanka