Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 25286 (CHH)

PARVEEN KUMAR v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/2870/2022 · 2025-04-11

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:16976 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 2870 of 2022 1 - Parveen Kumar S/o Raj Singh Aged About 43 Years R/o 239, Saidpur, Sonipat Haryana. Through Power Of Attorney Holder Bhagirathi Agrawal, Aged About 56 Years S/o Mahadev Lal Agrawal, R/o Hardi , Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Revenue , Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Raipur., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - The Collector District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 3 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh. 4 - Rajkumar Jangde S/o Baladram Satnami Aged About 47 Years R/o Village Sarseewa, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Baloda Bazar Bhatapara Chhattisgarh., District : Balodabazar-Bhathapara, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : None For State/Respondents No.1 to 3 : Mr. Khulesh Sahu, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Sashi Bhushan Tiwari, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.04.21 11:18:06 +0530 2 11/04/2025 1. The matter is called in two rounds and in both the rounds none present for the petitioner. 2. Since 22.03.2025, no one appearing in this case, as the matters were listed on 22.03.2025 and thereafter when the matter was directed to be listed on 03.04.2025, however, no one appears, as such it seems that the petitioner has lost the interest in pursuing this case. 3. In view of the above, this Court is having no other option except to dismiss the petition for want of prosecution. 4. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi