1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 126 of 2014 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Forest, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur Dist Raipur, Cg, Chhattisgarh 2 - Divisional Forest Officer Janjgir Champa, Forest Division, Distt Janjgir Champa, Cg, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh 3 - Instructor Forest Training School, Sakti, Distt Janjgir Champa, Cg, District : Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Krishna Kumar Sahu S/o Shri Malikram Sahu R/o Ward No. 10, Akhrabhatha, Post Sakti, Distt Janjgir Champa, Cg`, Chhattisgarh 2 - Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Distt Janjgir Champa, Cg, District : Janjgir- Champa, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents For Petitioners/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. G.A. For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Lav Sharma, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 07.04.2025 1. The petitioners/State have challenged the award passed by the learned Labour Court, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) in Case No.26/I.D.Act/2012/Reference dated 01.03.2014 whereby the order of termination of services was set aside and respondent No.1 was reinstated in service without payment of back wages. 2. Ms. Shukla, the learned Deputy Government Advocate appearing for the State/petitioners would fairly submit that respondent No.1 was reinstated in service vide order dated 29.04.2014. It is also stated that in the year 2012, age of respondent No.1 was 42 years and at present, his age REKHA SINGH Digitally signed by REKHA SINGH -2- would be approximately 55 years. She would contend that the award passed by the learned Labour Court has already been complied with. 3. On the other hand, Mr. Sharma, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1 would submit that as the services of respondent No.1 has already been reinstated, nothing survives for adjudication. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the records. 5. Taking into consideration the fact that pursuant to the award passed by the learned Labour Court dated 01.03.2014, respondent No.1 has already been reinstated in service vide order dated 29.04.2014 and only 4-5 years are left for his retirement, I do not find any good ground to interfere with the findings recorded by the learned Labour Court. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Rekha