DR. PAWAN KUMAR UPADHAYAY v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
WPS/2617/2023 · 2025-08-31
Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 16326 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 16326 (CHH) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
2025:CGHC:44481
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2617 of 2023 1 - Dr. Pawan Kumar Upadhayay S/o Late Umashankar Upadhayay Aged About 39 Years Working As Guest Lecturer Economics Subject At Govt. Revati Raman Mishra Post Graduate College Surajpur, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education Mahanadi Bhawan Atal Nagar New Raipur, District : Raipur,
Chhattisgarh 2 - Additional Director Higher Education Directorate Indrawati Bhawan Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Principal Govt. Revati Raman Mishra Post Graduate College Surajpur,
District
:
Surajpur,
Chhattisgarh 4 - Anand Kumar Paikra Working On The Post Of Assistant Professor (Economics Subject) At Govt. Revati Raman Mishra Post Graduate College Surajpur, District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT
2 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. A.N. Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. Ankur Kashyap, Dy. G.A.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad
Order on Board 01/09/2025
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:-
“10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside of the impugned order dated 8.4.2023 ANNEXURE P/1 passed by the respondent no.3 and further be please to allow the petitioner to continue on the said post till the regular appointment on the said post. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside of order dated 6.4.2023 ANNEXURE P/10 passed by the respondent no.2. 10.3 Any other relief or reliefs may also be granted to the petitioner which this Hon'ble court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case”
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the afflux of time, the petition has been rendered infructuous.
3
3. Learned counsel for the State/respondent agreed with the
submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and has no objection.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.
Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad)
Judge Raghu Jat