1 2025:CGHC:47983 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 877 of 2025 1 - Bhagwati Prasad Verma S/o Late Girdhari Lal Verma Aged About 57 Years R/o Near Mira Studio, Jagdalpur Tahsil And District- Jagdalpur (C.G.) ... Applicant(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Water Resources Ministry, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - High Power Caste Scrutiny Committee Through President-Cum Secretary Department Of Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribe Development, Tribal Research Training Institute, Pt. Dindayal Upadhyay Nagar, Sector-4, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Applicant : Ms. Apoorva Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent/ State : Shri Pramod Shrivastava, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 18.09.2025 1. Heard. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that applicant – Bhagwati Prasad Verma, who was the petitioner in WP(C) No.3628 of 2019 died during the pendency of the writ petition. An application for substitution of his legal representatives was moved in writ petition but NIRMALA RAO 2 his legal representatives were not substituted within the stipulated time. Consequently, pursuant to a preemptory order, the writ petition was dismissed. She would submit that this application for restoration has been filed in the name of Bhagwati Prasad Verma. She would further submit that she is ready to carry out the necessary amendments and prays to allow this application. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State would submit that as the application has been moved on behalf of a dead person, therefore, the application is not maintainable. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents present on record. 5. Considering the fact that Bhagwati Prasad Verma died during the pendency of the writ petition and although an application for substitution of legal representatives was allowed but no steps were taken for substitution of his legal representatives and therefore, the writ petition was dismissed on account of preemptory order. 6. The present application has been filed in the name of Bhagwati Prasad Verma, who is no more, and the memo has been filed by Ms. Apoorva Pandey and his associates on his behalf. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant is unable to explain who authorized or instructed her to file an application for restoration on behalf of a dead person. It is a well-settled principle of law that no suit, application or petition can be filed on behalf of or against a dead person. Accordingly, this application fails and is hereby dismissed. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi