1 2025:CGHC:44489 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 8257 of 2023 1 - Smt. Anjali Tirkey W/o Shri Vivek Jyoti Khande Aged About 38 Years Presently Working As Superintendent, Kasturba Gandhi Adiwasiya Vidyalaya, Jamarga, Block - Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Collector And Director District Mission, Samagra Shiksha, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 4 - The District Education Officer Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) 5 - The Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Smt. Malti Rathiya Posted As Headmistress, Govt. Middle School, Puri, Block-Gharghoda, District Raigarh (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : None. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 3 : Ms. Akanksha Jain, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 01/09/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- "10.1 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the record of case. 10.2 That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, thereby sett setting-aside/quashing the impugned order dated 06.10.2023 and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to continue at her present place of posting. 10.3 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.." 2. This petition has been preferred assailing the order dated 6.10.2023. It is pertinent to note that during the pendency of the present proceedings, no interim relief or order of stay has been 3 granted by this Court in favour of the petitioner. Consequently, in the absence of any protective order and in view of the subsequent developments, the present petition has lost its efficacy and has rendered itself infructuous. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the same and has no objection to the petition being dismissed as infructuous. 4. In view of the above, and since nothing further survives for adjudication, the petition is dismissed as infructuous. 5. However, liberty is granted to the respondent State authorities to pass appropriate orders in respect of transfer of the petitioner, in case exigency arises, without being influenced by this order. 6. With this observation, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat