Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/1597/2020 of JAYRAM RATHIYA Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 30 August 2026
2026:CGHC:38510 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1597 of 2020 Jayram Rathiya S/o Late Buduram Rathiya, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Libra, Tehsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of
CGHC010162542020
2026:CGHC:38510
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 1597 of 2020
Jayram Rathiya S/o Late Buduram Rathiya, Aged About 52 Years R/o Village Libra, Tehsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner
versus
1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue And Disaster Management Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Raigarh, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 3 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Cum- Land Acquisition Officer Gharghoda, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 4 - Asap Kumar Shatial S/o Nirdosh Bara Urao, R/o Village Salihabhata P.S. And Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh 5 - Jindal Power Limited Tamnar Through Its General Manager, P.S. And Tahsil Tamnar, District Raigarh Chhattisgarh,
... Respondents
For Petitioner
:
Shri Kamal Kishore Patel, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Surfaraj Khan, Advocate.
For
State/respondents
No.1 to 3.
:
Shri Atanu Ghosh, Dy.G.A.
For respondent No.4 :
Shri Sourabh Sharma, Advocate.
For respondent No.5 :
Shri Anuroop Panda, Advocate.
SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 31/08/2026
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. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of the submission made by learned counsel for the respective respondents on the earlier date of hearing that the revision filed by respondent No.4 against the order passed by the Collector is pending consideration before the Commissioner Bilaspur, Division Bilaspur, he may be permitted to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to contest the revision filed by respondent No.4.
2. In view of the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge gouri