1 2025:CGHC:47357 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5674 of 2023 1 - Manju Yadav Earlier Manju Thakur W/o Prem Prakash Yadav Aged About 42 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Rajpur, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 2 - Kanti Markam Earlier Kanti Netam W/o Manoj Markam Aged About 38 Years Presently Working As Teacher (L.B.) At Govt. Middle School Tatikasa, Shankul B. Nagar, Block S. Lohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 3 - Bhoopesh Kumar Yadu S/o Jayprakash Yadu Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Physical Teacher At Govt. Higher Secondary School Mohad, Block Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director Office Of Directorate Of Panchayat, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Director Public Instructions, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) ABHIGYA SAXENA Digitally signed by ABHIGYA SAXENA 2 6 - Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 7 - District Education Officer Kabirdham, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 8 - District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 9 - Block Education Officer S. Lohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.) 10 - Block Education Officer Dongargaon, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. C. J. K. Rao, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15.09.2025 1. During the course of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cause of action no longer survives, and in view of subsequent developments, the petition has been rendered infructuous. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute the same and has no objection to the petition being dismissed as infructuous. 3. In view of the above, and since nothing further survives for adjudication, the petition is dismissed as infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Saxena