Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 35853 (CHH)

DIRECTOR GENERAL CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE v. ANUPAM DEVNATH

REVP/214/2025 · 2025-08-24

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

Review Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:43052 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 214 of 2025 1 - Director General Central Industrial Security Force Headquarters, Block No. 13 C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. 2 - Inspector General Central Industrial Security Force Central Sector Headquarter Bhilai, District- Durg, Chhattisgarh. 3 - Deputy Inspector General Central Industrial Security Force, Secl Unit Bilaspur Headquarter,bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 4 - Commandant Central Industrial Security Force Secl Unit Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Anupam Devnath S/o Shri Govind Devnath Aged About 34 Years Constable Gd Cisf Unit Secl Bilaspur, R/o Pragati Nagar, Post Office Dipka, District- Korba, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anupam Devnath (in person). Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 25/08/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following prayer:- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to exercise its Jurisdiction vested in it under Order 47 Rule (1) CPC read with Section 151 of CPC and Rule 90 (1) of the High Court of Chhattisgarh Rules, 2007 and in exercise thereof review/recall the Order dated 13.06.2025 passed in No. 2024, and/or W.P.S. 2898 of pass/amend/recall other necessary orders in the interest of justice.” 2. This review petition has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 13.6.2025 passed in WPS No. 2898/2024. 3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and after going through the record, I do not find any legal error apparent on the face of the record in the judgment under review. 4. Accordingly, the review petition deserves to be and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat