JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

Heard Mr. B.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Mr. Vinay Pandey, learned Deputy Advocate General, appearing for the respondents/State.

2. The present intra Court appeal has been filed by the appellant/writ petitioner against the order dated 05.02.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No. 673 of 2024 (Smt. Manita Mandavi vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others), whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant/writ petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant/writ petitioner submits that the in the present case where a glance of writ petition entitles appellant/writ petitioner the relief claimed and irony is that in the writ petition itself the appellant/writ petitioner has relied upon the judgment in the matter of Radha Krishan Industries vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, reported in (2021) 6 SCC 771 and dealt with the aspect of availability of alternate remedy and when alternative remedy will not divest the High Court of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India which also includes the exception under Clause 27.3 and the appellant/writ petitioner's case come