Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50444 (CHH)

C. M. NURSING INSTITUTE v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/4781/2021 · 2025-02-27

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:10170 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4781 of 2021 1. C. M. Nursing Institute Managed By Chandoo Lal Chandrakar Memorial Hospital Through The Director C.M. Nursing Institute Nehru Nagar Square, GE Road Bhilai, Chhattisgarh 2. Felloship School Of Nursing Managed By Fellowship Educational Charitable Organisation Registered Under The Society Registration Act 1973 Through The President, Fellowship Educational Charitable Organisation Plot No. 1857/10, Bhaleshwar Road, Ward No. 29, Tumgaon Road, Mahasamund, Distt.- Mahasamund Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioners Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary To The Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Department Of Medical Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, P.S. - Rakhi, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Director Directorate Of Medical Education, Old Nursing Hostel, Mantralaya Campus, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur- Chhattisgarh- 492001 3. Indian Nursing Council Through Registrar Indian Nursing Council, 8th Floor, NBCC Centre, Plot No. 2 Community Centre, Okhla Phase-I, New Delhi – 110020 4. Chhattisgarh Nurses Registration Council Through The Registrar, Chhattisgarh Nurses Registration Council, Old Nurses Hostel Directorate Health Services Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioners : Mr. Anurag Dayal Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 & 2 For Respondent No. 3 For Respondent No. 4 : : : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Deputy Advocate General Ms. Jyoti Singh, Advocate holding the brief of Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Deputy Solicitor General Mr. Vikas Dubey, Advocate Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI 2 Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 28/02/2025 1. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that grievance of the petitioners has already been redressed as order impugned has been withdrawn by the respondent authorities and the petitioners were permitted to take admission by virtue of interim order; thus, he would pray to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to revive it if cause of action subsists. 2. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents would not oppose the submission made by counsel for the petitioners. 3. Recording the submission made by counsel for the petitioners, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti