1 2025:CGHC:34316 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 378 of 2021 1 - Manju Devi W/o Kamal Dev Singh Aged About 68 Years Presently R/o H. No. 312, Supela Bazar, Chudi Line, Nehru Bhawan Road, Supela, Bhilai, P.S. Supela, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- Secretary, General Administration Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector, Durg Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Durg Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh 5 - Yogendra Verma Additional Tahsildar And Executive Magistrate, Bhilai, District Durg, Chhattisgarh 6 - Kamal Dev Singh S/o Late Arjun Singh Aged About 70 Years R/o Behind Chudi Line, Supela, Bhilai, P.S. Supela, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. Present Address- Shop No. 29-B, Dakshin Gangotri Supela, Bhilai, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : None. For Respondent/ State : Shri Prateek Tiwari, P.L. SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.07.2025 1. None appears on behalf of the petitioner even when the case is taken up for hearing in the second round. 2. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate writ/orders/directions to the respondent no. 1, 2 & 3 for maintaining status of petitioner prior to date of 31.01.2020. (ii) That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to issue a appropriate writ/orders/directions to respondent no. 1, 2 & 3 to initiate action against the respondent no. 5 & 6 for abuse of process of law in the blindage of Hon'ble High Court order dated 16.10.2019. (iii) That, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to issue appropriate writ/orders/directions a to respondents to pay compensation minimum Rs. 10,00,000/- to the petitioner and recover it from respondent no. 5 & 6. (iv) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief which seems just and fair in the eyes of law, looking to the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. The petitioner has challenged the order passed under the provisions of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer (Revenue)/ the Tribunal. It is also informed by Shri Vidya Bhushan Soni, who was appearing for respondent No.6, that respondent No.6 – Kamal Dev Singh, the husband of the petitioner, has died during pendency of this petition. 3 4. Taking into consideration the fact that the order passed by the Sub- Divisional Officer (Revenue) is appealable, and further, respondent No.6 against whom relief has been sought, has died, the petition is dismissed on these grounds. The petitioner would be at liberty to avail the remedy available under the law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi