High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/396/2017disposed off

Fekuram Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-02-22Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 396 of 2017 • Fekuram Sahu S/o Baisakhu Ram Sahu, Aged About 52 Years R/o Bera, Post Kanhera, Tehsil And District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Women And Child Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Collector, Bemetara, District Bemetara, (Chhattisgarh)

3. Chief Executive OfÏcer, Zila Panchayat, Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

4. Sub Divisional OfÏcer ( Revenue), Bemetara, District Bemetara, (Chhattisgarh)

5. Project OfÏcer, Integrated Child Development Project Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

6. District Program OfÏcer Women And Child Development Department Bemetara, District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh)

7. Gram Panchayat Bera, Through : Secretary Village Panchayat Bera, Post Kanhera, Tehsil And District Bemetara, Chhattisgarh.

8. Devendra Singh Verma, S/o Ferha Verma, Sarpanch Village Panchayat Bera, Post Kanhera, Tehsil And District Bemetara (Chhattisgarh) ---- Respondent For Petitioner Mr. P.P. Sahu, Advocate For Respondent /State Mr. UNS Deo, Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 22/2/2017

1. Heard.

2. The petitioner is objecting to the construction of Aanganbadi Centre opposite his house, because, for such construction, a different location was already identified by the Supervisor of Baiji Sector, District Bemetara.

3. In exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ Court should not enter into such questions where conflicting claims of the members of the locality are involved. It should be better left to the wisdom of the concerned Department, which shall take a decision in the matter.

4. Considering all the relevant aspects, since the petitioner and other villagers have moved a representation before the SDO(R), Bemetara, but no orders have been passed on that representation, ends of justice would be served if the writ petition is disposed of with direction that in the event, the petitioner prefers fresh representation before the SDO(R), Bemetara, within a period of 03 weeks from today, the said authority shall consider and decide the representation objectively within a further period of 06 weeks.

5. It is ordered accordingly. Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Shyna