^ AT BILASPUR f[)^ ,2003 Tembai, Wife of Syresh Sahu Aged about 21 years, .-•••• ^<v...v ^^>'n .^^^c&'- ^^y^ T^'--" ./ ^<**5^$. R/o Village ChandrapUr, Gram Panchayat Parpatpali, Bagbahra, Distt. Mahasaruund (C.G.) &al ;3" ^y^s^'8 %^<'?^s';^ VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund 2. Secretary Janpad Panchayat, Vikaskhand Bagbahara, Tahsil & Distt. Mahasamund. 3. The Secretary Mahila Bal Vikash Mantralaya DKS Bhawan Raipur. /4. Grain Panchayat Parpatpali, Through Sarpanch of the Graru Panchayat Vikas Khand Bagbahara, Distt. Mahasamund. Charapa bai W/o Gaslal Sahu aged about 29 years R/o Village chandrapur, Vikaskhand, Bagbahra, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETITIpN_UNDER ART1CLE 226/227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA a it ', I i.ffii1!; 1 I, lf^sy~jr %c^/ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (Hon. Mr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) Writ Petition No. 404 of 2003 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS VERSUS Tembai State of ChhaTtisgarh and others Shri Vaibhav Goverdhan, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Bhaskar Paysi PLforthe respondents 1 to 3. Shri Akhilesh Kumar counsel for respondent No.5. WRIT PETITIONS UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER (14.12.2011) Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 11.11.2002 (Annexure P-9) passed by the Collector, Mahasamund dismissing the appeal of the petitioner preferred under Rule 3 of the Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995, for want of prosecution. 2. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has never received any notice from the Collector, Mahasamund and therefore she could not appear before it. He submits that it would be just and proper to decide the appeal of the petitioner on merit as the similar order has been passed by this Court in W.P. 705/2003. 3. Counsel for the respondents seriously oppose this submission of the counsel for the petitioner. 4. Taking into consideration the submissions made by the counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the larger interest ofjustice, without entering into the merits of the case, order impugned (Annexure P-9) is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded to the Collector, Mahasamund for being decided afresh on merit after hearing the parties. Petitioner and the respondent No.5 are directed to appear before the Collector, Mahasamund, on 16.1.2012. 5. Petition thus allowed. Certified copy as per rules. Pritinker Di'waker Judge