Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 22575 (CHH)

RAJKUMAR SHARMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/3678/2023 · 2025-07-22

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:35451 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3678 of 2023 1 - Rajkumar Sharma S/o Late Shri Byas Prasad Sharma Aged About 69 Years R/o Ward No. 15 Nagar Panchayat Pandariya Tehsil Pandariya-District Kabirdham (C.G.) 2 - Indrajeet Singh Thakur S/o Late Ramsingh Thakur Aged About 67 Years R/o Ward No. 10, Bairagpara Pandariya, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 3 - Devendra Upadhyay S/o Late Shri Rewaram Upadhyay Aged About 64 Years R/o Opposite St. Xavier's School, Kalimai Ward, Pandariya Road, Mungeli, District Mungeli (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Urban Administration And Development Department, Indravati Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Directorate, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Executive Engineer Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Directorate, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Nagar Panchayat Pandariya Through The Chief Municipal Officer, Pandariya, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 5 - Chief Municipal Officer Nagar, Panchayat, Pandariya, District Kabirdham (C.G.) Digitally signed by GOPAL SINGH Date: 2025.07.29 19:19:47 +0530 2 6 - Deputy Director (Pension) Directorate, Urban Administration And Development Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Prithvi Raj Sahu, Advocate on behalf of Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate For State : Shri Ankur Kashyap, Dy. Government Advocate For Respondent No.5 : Shri Devesh Chandra Verma, Advocate Hon’ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 23/07/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this petition has become infructuous. 2. In view of the submission made, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) JUDGE Gopal Singh