1 2025:CGHC:2369-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WA No. 902 of 2024 Vinod Sharma S/o Late Shri C.R. Sharma Aged About 62 Years B-81, Dream City, Khamtarai, Bilaspur, District-Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Appellant versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Forest Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Chief Conservator of Forest (Non Gazetted) Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Conservator of Forest General Forest Division Kanker, District Kanker Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Appellant : Mr. Danish A. Siddiqui, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Additional Advocate General Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice Hon'ble Shri Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 15.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. Danish A. Siddiqui, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Yashwant Singh Thakur, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State/respondents. ANURADHA TIWARI Digitally signed by ANURADHA TIWARI Date: 2025.01.15 17:23:49 +0530 2 2. The present writ appeal has been filed by the appellant seeking following reliefs:- “(I) That, the Hon’ble Court may Kindly set- aside the impugned order Dated 23.10.2024 (Annexure-A/1) passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in Review Petition No.226/2024 (Vinod Sharma vs. State of C.G. & Ors.); (II) To kindly to be protect the pensionary and other consequential benefits of the appellant as Stenographer. (III) Grant any other order that may be deemed fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of cost in favour of the appellants.” 3. The prayer made in the present appeal appears to be defective one as the appellant has only challenging the order dated 23.10.2024 passed in Review Petition No.226 of 2024 and the order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.1143 of 2012 has not been challenged. 4. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellant states that he may be permitted to withdraw this appeal with a liberty to file it afresh with proper prayer and pleadings, particularly, challenging the order dated 02.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No.1143 of 2012. 3 5. In view of the above, instant writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn granting liberty in favour of the appellant to file it afresh with proper prayer and pleadings. Sd/- Sd/- (Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Anu