Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 51188 (CHH)

SAMINUDDIN ANSARI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/7607/2023 · 2025-10-14

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:51447 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 7607 of 2023 1 - Saminuddin Ansari S/o Jasimuddin Ansari Aged About 46 Years Sahayak Samiti Sevak, Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti (Lamps), Namnakala, Ambikapur, District Surguja And R/o Imlipara, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Firms And Societies, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Registrar Co-Operative Society, State Of Chhattisgarh, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 3 - Deputy Registrar Cooperative Societies, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.). 4 - Adim Jati Seva Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Through Its Manager (Samiti), Namna Kala, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Harsh Verma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Rahul Agrawal, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 4 : Ms. Seema Verma, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Jitendra Shrivastava, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Order on Board 15/10/2025 1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 11-09-2019 (Annexure P-1) and order dated 21-07-2023 (Annexure P-2). 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the petitioner to work as a Sahayak Samiti Sevak. 10.3 Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper, may also be passed in favor of the petitioner together with cost of the petition.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the petition at this juncture. 3. No objection has been raised from other side. 4. Accordingly, the prayer is allowed and the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to challenge the order which has been subsequently passed against the petitioner. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat