SONU BHARTI vs SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED Advocate - PANKAJ AGRAWAL — WPC/2593/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 16th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010179782026

Filing Number

WPS/10369/2026

Filing Date

01-May-2026

Registration No

WPC/2593/2026

Registration Date

15-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

LAND ACQUISITION & REQUISITION MATTERS ( 5 )

Sub-Category

OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES. ( 504 )

Judicial Branch

Writ Section

Decision Date

16-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SONU BHARTI

    Adv. Arvind Shrivastava,SYED JAYED ZIYA ALI,SYED JAYED ZIYA ALI, ,SYED JAYED ZIYA ALI,SYED JAYED ZIYA ALI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SOUTH EASTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED Advocate - PANKAJ AGRAWAL

  2. 2.Chief General Manager

  3. 3.General Manager

  4. 4.Nodal Officer/Staff Officer (Land and Rehabilitation)

  5. 5.Collector

    Adv. A.G.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 16-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore PrasadView PDF

    Case Summary: Sonu Bharti v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of Sonu Bharti's writ petition challenging SECL's rejection of her rehabilitation/employment claim. The court found the claim was pending only due to non-receipt of State Government recommendation, not rejected on merits, and directed SECL to expeditiously obtain the recommendation and thereafter process her employment eligibility in accordance with applicable policy and law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 16-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad

  4. 01-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WPC/2593/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Sonu Bharti v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited The High Court of Chhattisgarh disposed of Sonu Bharti's writ petition challenging SECL's rejection of her rehabilitation/employment claim. The court found the claim was pending only due to non-receipt of State Government recommendation, not rejected on merits, and directed SECL to expeditiously obtain the recommendation and thereafter process her employment eligibility in accordance with applicable policy and law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case