Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 21627 (CHH)

FARID AHMAD QURESHI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH,

WPS/3566/2023 · 2025-08-31

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:44475 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3566 of 2023 1 - Farid Ahmad Qureshi S/o . Late Vakil Ahmad Qureshi, Aged About 61 Years R/o- Nagar Nigam Colony, Ward No. 24, Near Maharana Pratap Chowk, Rajendra Nagar, Bilaspur, District - Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, General Administration Department Of Chhattisgarh, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - The Commissioner, Nagar Nigam, Bilaspur, Office At Nehru Chowk, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Choubey, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/ State : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, PL For Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Harshwardhan Agrawal, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Order on Board 01/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “I. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue order/orders, writ/writs and direction/directions by directing to respondents, and to quash the order impugned in respect of the petitioner transfer only, (Ann. P/1) with immediate effects. II. This Hon'ble Court may kindly be issue direction and direct the respondent authority to strictly comply with the policy condition as there is no case of administrative exigency. III. Any other relief/relief's, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 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 respondents 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