1 CGHC010268932026 2026:CGHC:29885 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally WPC No. 3680 of 2026 signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 1 - Gram Panchayat Pacheda Through Its Up- Sarpanch And Authorized Signatory Abhishek Singh, S/o- Than Singh, Aged 30 Years, Up-Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Pacheda, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development , Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Union Of India Through Secretary, Rural Development Ministry, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. 3 - Joint Secretary, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Rural Development Department, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. 4 - Commissioner, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Third Floor, Vikas Bhawan, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 5 - Collector, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 6 - District Program Officer (M G N R E G A), District- Jangir- Champa (C.G.). 7 - Zila Panchayat Janjgir, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, District-Jangir- Champa (C.G.). 8 - Janjpad Panchayat Nawagarh, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, District- Jangir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from CIS Periphery.) 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate. For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra Dy. G.A. For UOI : Ms. Shweta Rai, C.G.C. on behalf of Mr.

Ramakant Mishra, D.S.G.I. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for following reliefs:-“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to clear the error committed in the MIS portal of the MGNREGA and clear the dues of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner and release the payment of Rs. 5.68 lakhs with interest of 12% per annum in favour of the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the actions of the respondent authorities, particularly respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a representation before the competent authorities way back in the month of February 2026, seeking redressal of his grievances. However, despite the lapse of considerable time, the said representation has neither been considered nor decided. It is further submitted that, in the absence of any decision on the representation, the petitioner is deprived of an opportunity to avail the appropriate legal remedy against the same. In these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the pending representation within a stipulated period. 3 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the petitioner's representation is pending consideration before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law within a reasonable period. It is further submitted that the State has no objection if an appropriate direction is issued by this Court to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending representation in accordance with law, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

4. Considering the submission made by learned State counsel, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the competent Authority to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation, by passing an appropriate order expeditiously in accordance with law within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the competent authority shall take an independent decision in accordance with law. 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju

1 CGHC010268932026 2026:CGHC:29885 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Digitally WPC No. 3680 of 2026 signed by RAVVA UTTEJ KUMAR RAJU 1 - Gram Panchayat Pacheda Through Its Up- Sarpanch And Authorized Signatory Abhishek Singh, S/o- Than Singh, Aged 30 Years, Up-Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Pacheda, Janpad Panchayat Nawagarh, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development , Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Union Of India Through Secretary, Rural Development Ministry, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. 3 - Joint Secretary, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Rural Development Department, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi. 4 - Commissioner, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, Third Floor, Vikas Bhawan, Sector-19, North Block, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.). 5 - Collector, District- Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). 6 - District Program Officer (M G N R E G A), District- Jangir- Champa (C.G.). 7 - Zila Panchayat Janjgir, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, District-Jangir- Champa (C.G.). 8 - Janjpad Panchayat Nawagarh, Through Its Chief Executive Officer, District- Jangir- Champa (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause title is taken from CIS Periphery.) 2 For Petitioner : Mr. Sourabh Sahu, Advocate. For State : Mr. Shobhit Mishra Dy. G.A. For UOI : Ms. Shweta Rai, C.G.C. on behalf of Mr.

Ramakant Mishra, D.S.G.I. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15/07/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition for following reliefs:-“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to clear the error committed in the MIS portal of the MGNREGA and clear the dues of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation of the petitioner and release the payment of Rs. 5.68 lakhs with interest of 12% per annum in favour of the petitioner. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper, may also kindly be granted to the petitioner, in the interest of justice.”

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is aggrieved by the actions of the respondent authorities, particularly respondent Nos. 2 and 3. It is submitted that the petitioner had submitted a representation before the competent authorities way back in the month of February 2026, seeking redressal of his grievances. However, despite the lapse of considerable time, the said representation has neither been considered nor decided. It is further submitted that, in the absence of any decision on the representation, the petitioner is deprived of an opportunity to avail the appropriate legal remedy against the same. In these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the pending representation within a stipulated period. 3 3. Learned State counsel submits that if the petitioner's representation is pending consideration before the competent authority, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law within a reasonable period. It is further submitted that the State has no objection if an appropriate direction is issued by this Court to the competent authority to consider and dispose of the petitioner's pending representation in accordance with law, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case.

4. Considering the submission made by learned State counsel, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's claim, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the competent Authority to consider and decide the petitioner's pending representation, by passing an appropriate order expeditiously in accordance with law within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the competent authority shall take an independent decision in accordance with law. 5. With this observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju