. Item No. D-2 Muslim Committee Jama Masjid Bilaspur and another Vs. Union of India and others. CMP No. 25733 of 2024 in CWP No. 5070 of 2022. 20.07.2026 Present: Mr. Paresh Sharma, Advocate, for Mr. Rajiv Rai, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Balram Sharma, DSGI, with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent-UOI. Mr. Arsh Rattan, Deputy Advocate General, for the respondents-State. Mr. Peeyush Bhardwaj, Advocate, for Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate, for respondent No.8. CMP No. 25733 of 2024 The present application has been filed for revival and restoration of Civil Writ Petition No. 5070 of 2022, titled Muslim Committee Jama Masjid Bilaspur and another Vs. Union of India and others, in terms of the observations made in the decision dated 03.05.2023 and to initiate proceedings for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court. 2. Keeping in view the controversy as such, we had passed the following order on 19.12.2025:- “CMP No. 25733 of 2024 Notice in the application to respondent No.8, returnable for 12th March, 2026, on taking steps within one week. Keeping in view the fact that the FIR No.34 dated 19.02.2021 has been registered against respondent No.8, who is stated to be Government Teacher, the State shall also file status report as to what departmental action has been taken against the said respondent for the alleged misconduct while holding the post.” 3. Necessary status report has been filed, in which it has been mentioned that respondent No.8 was firstly placed under suspension vide order dated 04.07.2023 and thereafter, an inquiry had also been conducted against the said respondent, who was working as a T.G.T (Arts) and after taking into consideration the reply of the respondent, which was found unsatisfactory, his services were dispensed with in the Department of Education by compulsory retiring him with effect from 31.05.2024 and imposing major penalty, under Rule 11(vii) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1955. 4. Keeping in view the above, we are of the considered opinion that the purpose of the application has been served, as the State has taken affirmative action regarding the misconduct as such of the said respondent while in service and no further order is required to be passed by this Court. 5. Accordingly, the present application is disposed, so also the other pending applications, if any. (G.S. Sandhawalia) Chief Justice (Bipin C. Negi) Judge July 20, 2026 (Shivank Thakur)