Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 29525 (CHH)

DR. M K NAIK v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/5638/2019 · 2025-06-30

Shri Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:29329 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5638 of 2019 1 - Dr. M K Naik S/o Late Chakradhar Naik Aged About 61 Years Occupation-In- Charge Civil Surgeon Cum Hospital Superintendent Dantewada, Resident-District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Dr. R.L. Ganesh S/o Late M.R. Ganesh, Senior Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Dr. Sanjay Kumar Baghel S/o Shri C.M. Baghel, Senior Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Dr. Manish Meahram S/o Late R.D. Meshram, Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 5 - Dr. Sanjay Kashyap S/o Mr. Ashok Kashyap, Senior Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 6 - Dr. Desh Deepak S/o Shri K. Choudhry, Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.), District : Dantewada, Chhattisgarh. 7 - Dr. N.R. Navaratan S/o Shri B.M. Navaratan, Chief Medical And Health Officer, District South Bastar Dantewada (C.G.). 8 - Dr. Surya Gupta S/o Late Rama Krishan Rao, Medical Officer, District Hospital Dantewada (C.G.) All Petitioner Resident Of District Hospital Premises Dantewada, District Dantewada (C.G). ... Petitioners versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Director Directorate Of Health Services, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.). ... Respondents (Cause-title, as taken from CIS System) 2 For Petitioners : None For State/Respondent(s) : Mrs. Mukta Tripathi, Panel Lawyer. (Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 01/07/2025 1. On previous date of hearing, none appeared for the petitioners. Even today, despite repeated calls, neither the petitioners appeared nor represented by any counsel. In this circumstance, this Court has no other option except to dismiss the instant petition for want of prosecution. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) JUDGE Rukhsar RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2025.07.01 17:05:18 +0530