Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3620 (CHH)

SUKDEV SIDAR v. GHASIYA SIDAR

WPC/721/2021 · 2025-06-22

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:26739 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 721 of 2021 1 - Sukdev Sidar S/o Maheshram Sidar, Aged About 53 Years R/o Village Loharindipa, Post Office Lambar, Block And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner versus 1 - Ghasiya Sidar S/o Charan Sidar, Aged About 46 Years R/o Village Loharindipa, Post Office Lambar, Block And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 2 - Banitram Sidar, S/o Fauda Sidar, Aged About 45 Years R/o Village Loharindipa, Post Office Lambar, Block And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 3 - Kaushal Kumar, S/o Budhuram Sidar, Aged About 40 Years R/o Village Loharindipa, Post Office Lambar, Block And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund (Chhattisgarh), District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 4 - Gajanand Sahu, Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Maldamal, Presiding Officer Booth No. 58, Village- Loharindipa, Post Office Lambar, Block And Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 5 - Anantram Patel, Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Paraskol, Presiding Officer Booth No. 59, Village Bhaunradadar, Gram Panchayat Lohrindipa, Block Basna, Tahsil Basna, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh 6 - The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Prescribed Authority, Saraipali, District Mahasamund Chhattisgarh., District : Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Vikram Pratap, Advocate holding the brief of Shri Shikhar Sharma, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Vedant Shadangi, P.L. SMT NIRMALA RAO -2- Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 23.06.2025 1. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by efflux of time, the petition has become infructuous. 2. Taking into consideration the statement made by counsel for the petitioner, this petition is dismissed being rendered infructuous. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi