1 2025:CGHC:45815 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 9632 of 2019 1 - Baji Lal Singh S/o Munna Pratap Singh Aged About 48 Years Occupation- Inspector, Police Station Biharpur Chandni Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Inspector General Of Police Range Surguja, Ambikapur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh., District : Surguja (Ambikapur), Chhattisgarh 3 - Superintendent Of Police Surajpur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh 4 - Sub Divisional Officer Police Odgi, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh., District : Surajpur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : None For State/Respondent/s : Mr. Rajeev Bharat, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Order on Board RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.09.11 12:08:25 +0530 2 09/09/2025 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under article 226/227 of Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s): “10.1 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set-aside the order dated 18.05.2019 passed by respondent No.2. 10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to make adequate subsistence allowance to the petitioner as per Rule 53 of M.P./C.G. Fundamental Rule. 10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may also direct the respondent authorities pay the arrears of the subsistence allowance immediately. 10.4 That, the Hon'ble Court further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice and fair play.” 2. Learned counsel for the respondent-State would submit that in the instant petition the petitioner has challenged his suspension order Annexure P/1 dated 18.05.2019 issued by the respondent No.2, but the same has already been revoked, therefore, this petition become infructuous. 3. In view of above, instant petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Ravi Mandavi