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 1]

Chattisgarh High Court

Smt. Mamta Markam vs State Of Chhattisgarh 24 Wps/2653/2013 ... on 25 April, 2018

Author: Sanjay K. Agrawal

Bench: Sanjay K. Agrawal

                                         1

                                                                             NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                         Writ Petition (C) No. 1204 of 2018

        Smt. Mamta Markam, W/o Shri Chhabilal Markam, aged about 28 years,
        Elected and Working as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat- Jirrapara, R/o
        Village - Jirrapara, P.S. Tahsil Vishrampuri, District Kondagaon, (C.G.)

                                                                     ---- Petitioner

                                      Versus

     1. State of Chhattisgarh, through its Secretary, Department of Panchayat and
        Rural Development, Secretariat at Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District
        Raipur (C.G.)

     2. Director, Panchayat, Directorate at Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, District
        Raipur (C.G.)

     3. Collector, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon (C.G.)

     4. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Kondagaon, District Kondagaon
        (C.G.)

     5. Chief Executive Officer,    Janpad     Panchayat,   Baderajpur,   District -
        Kondagaon (C.G.)

                                                                  --- Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Jha, Advocate. For Respondents : Mr. Avinash Singh, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 25/04/18

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that petitioner may be allowed to make representation before the State Government for providing basic amenities to Gram Panchayat- Jirrapara, Janpad Panchayat - Baderajpur, District Kondagaon.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The prayer appears to be fair and reasonable and is accordingly 2 allowed.

4. Be that as it may, petitioner is at liberty to make representation before the State Government within three weeks from today which will be considered and decided by the said authority within a further period of four weeks from the date of receipt of representation.

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

Sd/-

(Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka