1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4121 of 2019 1 - Smt. Nirmala Kashyap Wd/o Late Pappu @ Rajesh Kashyap Aged About 33 Years R/o Ring Road Namnaka, Police Station And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., 2 - The Commissioner Surguja Division, Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 3 - The Collector Ambikapur, District Surguja, Ambikapur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Tahsildar Ambikapur, District Surguja (Ambikapur),Chhattisgarh. 5 - Sardar Surendra Singh Bhamara S/o Sardar Udham Singh Aged About 68 Years R/o Mayapur, Ambikapur, Tahsil And Police Station Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 6 - Rajmaniya W/do Late Sukhana Aged About 58 Years R/o Near Pani Tanki, Namnakala, Nagar Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. 7 - Savitri D/o Late Sukhana Aged About 38 Years R/o Near Pani Tanki, Namnakala, Nagar Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2026.01.16 17:02:27 +0530 2 8 - Leelavati D/o Late Sukhana Aged About 27 Years R/o Near Pani Tanki, Namnakala, Nagar Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh 9 - Bajrang S/o Late Sukhana Aged About 25 Years R/o Near Pani Tanki, Namnakala, Nagar Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh., 10 - Sardar Jasveer Singh Bhamara Through Jasveer Motors, R/o Ring Road Namnaka, Police Station And Tahsil Ambikapur, District Surguja Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Shri Ashok Kumar Shukla, Advocate For Respondents 1 to 4/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Govt. Adv. For Respondents 5 and 10 : Shri Arpan Verma, Advocate For Respondents 6 to 9 : Shri Nishikant Sinha, Advocate ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Order on Board 16/01/2026 This writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 14/10/2019 passed by the Commissioner District Surguja in Revenue case No.201509960100002/60 year 2014-2015 (Sardar Surendra Singh v. Rajmaniya and ors.). By the impugned order, an application for staying the proceedings pending before the Commissioner filed by the petitioner dated 13/06/2017 was rejected and the matter was posted for final hearing. 2. This writ petition was filed in the year 2019 and remained pending for all these years without there being any interim order in favour of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the original proceedings in which the impugned order was passed has finally been decided by the Commissioner vide its order dated 23/12/2025. The revision has been admitted. A copy of that order is placed on record and be made part of record. Thus, this writ petition has become infructuous. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the original proceedings before the Commissioner has already been concluded, this writ petition has become infructuous and the petitioner may take legal remedy against the order 3 passed by the Commissioner. 5. In view of above, nothing survives for adjudication. This writ petition is disposed off having become infructuous. All pending applications, if any, are disposed off. Sd/- ({Sachin Singh Rajput}) JUDGE Deepti