Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 46210 (CHH)

RAHUL SHARMA v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/10912/2019 · 2025-09-17

Shri Deepak Kumar Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:48047 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 10451 of 2019 Vipin Kumar Pradhan S/o Shri Ram Kishan Pradhan Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Kodabhat, Tahsil And District Kanker Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner. versus 1 - State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Medical Education, Old Nurses Hostel, Dks Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) WPS No. 10912 of 2019 Rahul Sharma S/o Shri A.P. Sharma Aged About 28 Years R/o Village Sandi Tahsil And District Durg, Chhattisgarh. ---Petitioner(s) Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Health And Family Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhavan Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2 - Director Directorate Of Medical Education Old Nurses Hostel, Dks Bhawan Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) AVINASH SHARMA Digitally signed by AVINASH SHARMA Date: 2025.09.24 10:50:35 +0530 2 For Petitioners : Ms. Zainab Vanak appears on behalf of Shri Sandeep Singh, Advocates. For State/Res : Shri Dashrath Lal Prajapati, Panel Lawyer. Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari Order on Board 18/09/2025 1. At the outset, learned State counsel submits that both Writ Petitions have become infructuous as petitioner namely Vipin Kumar Pradhan has already been appointed on the post of Assistant Grade -III on 27.12.2019 and petitioner namely Rahul Sharma has also been appointed on the post of Assistant Grade -III on 21.01.2020 and both of them have joined their respective services. 2. Counsel for the petitioners submits that she also does not want to press the Petitions as they have become infructuous. 3. In view of the aforesaid submissions, both Writ Petitions are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous. Sd/- (Deepak Kumar Tiwari) Judge Avinash