1 2025:CGHC:18473 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7048 of 2018 • Mohandas Manikpuri S/o Shri Madhodas Manikpuri, Aged About 45 Years Social Servant, Kalimata Mandir Marg, Jora Para, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Mobile No. 9406121111 ... Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Public Administration, Capital Complex, New Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Municipal Corporation Through Commissioner, White House, Gandhi Chowk, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Public Service Commission, Through The Secretary, Shankar Nagar Square, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Dr. Preetam Mishra Ayurved Chikitsa Adhikari C/o Municipal Corporation, White House, Gandhi Chowk, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Sudeep Johri, Advocate For Respondent No. 1 For Respondent No. 2 For Respondent No. 3 For Respondent No. 4 : : : : Mr. Topilal Bareth, Panel Lawyer Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate Mr. Manish Thakur, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23/04/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That the Hon'ble court may kind enough to call the record of the petitioner. 10.2 That the Hon'ble court may be kind enough to issue any writ / writs, order / orders, direction / directions and to Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 command the respondent no. 1 to 3 to dismiss the services of the respondent no. 4 by issuance of Writ of Quo Warranto. 10.3 That the Hon'ble court may be kind enough to issue any other writ or writs order or direction as deem fit in the circumstances of the case.” 2. Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 and Dr. Sudeep Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 3 would submit that respondent No. 4 has already got retired from services. 3. Heard. 4. Taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner has sought for issuance of writ of quo warranto for dismissal of services of respondent No. 4 and he has already got retired from services, therefore, nothing survives for adjudication. 5. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to file fresh petition, if cause of action survives or new cause of action arises in future. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti