← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/314/2018disposed off

Harijan Machhua Sahkari Samiti Maryadit v. Mahamaya Maliha Swa Sahayata Samooh

2018-02-05Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 314 of 2018 Harijan Machhua Sahkari Samiti Maryadit, Nandeli (After The Amendment Chhattisgarh Anusuchit Jati Machhua Sahkari Samiti Nandeli (Sakti), Through The Secretary Ramanand Tandan, S/o Hari Ram, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Village Nandeli, Tahsil And Block Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. Mahamaya Maliha Swa Sahayata Samooh Sothi, Through The President Kailash Bai W/o Late Hingal Ram Satnami, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village Sothi, Tahsil Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

2. Minimata Mahila Swa Sahayata Samooh, Sothi, Through The President Shiv Kumar W/ Laxmi Narayan, Aged About 45 Years, R/o. Village Sothi, Tahsil And Block Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh

3. Assistant Director, Fisheries, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh

4. Collector, Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : JanjgirChampa, Chhattisgarh

5. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Sothi, Tahsil And Block Sakti, District Janjgir Champa (Chhattisgarh), District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Ishwar Jaiswal, Advocate.

For Respondents/State :

Mr. Arun Sao, Dy. Advocate General.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 05/02/18 1.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner would submit that against the resolution dated 14.08.2017 (Annexure- P/1), petitioner society has made a representation before respondents No. 3 and 4 which is pending consideration since 18.09.2017 and has not been decided till date, therefore

the respondent authorities be directed to consider and decide the same expeditiously.

2.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Be that as it may, the respondents No. 3 and 4 are directed to consider and decide the petitioner's representation for allotment of lease of ponds to the petitioner's society expeditiously preferably within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of representation. 4.

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

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Priyanka