Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 7]

Chattisgarh High Court

Balbir Singh Hora vs State Of Chhattisgarh 18 Wpc/1202/2018 ... on 30 April, 2018

Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                            1

                                                                                  NAFR

              HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                                 WPC No. 1207 of 2018

        Balbir Singh Hora S/o Kartar Singh Hora, aged about 55 years, Proprietor of
        Navin Kiraya Bhandar, R/o Infront of Gurunanak Haal, Telibandh, Shyam
        Nagar Road, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.)

                                                                           ---- Petitioner

                                         Versus

     1. State of Chhattisgarh through Chief Election Officer, Raipur, District Raipur
        (C.G.)

     2. Collector / District Election Officer, District Kabirdham (C.G.)

     3. Sub-Divisional Officer, Public Works Department, Kawardha, District
        Kabirdham (C.G.)

                                                                      ---- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Govind Dewangan, Advocate. For Respondents/State : Mr. D. R. Minj, Dy. G. A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 30/04/18

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner may be allowed to make representation before the Collector, District Kabirdham for redressal of his grievance.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is allowed.

4. Be that as it may, petitioner would be at liberty to make representation before the Collector, District Kabirdham for redressal of his grievance, who, in turn, shall consider and decide the said representation strictly in accordance with law, expeditiously. 2

5. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

6. With the aforesaid observation, the writ petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to cost(s).

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka