Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 53925 (CHH)

JYOTI MICHEAL XALXO v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/3034/2023 · 2025-10-28

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:52768 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3034 of 2023 1 - Jyoti Micheal Xalxo Wd/o Late Herman Micheal Xalxo, R/o 371, Rachna Nagar, Govindpura, Bhopal, District Bhopal (M.P.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Transport, Third Floor, Block-C, Indrawati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Regional Transport Officer Raipur R.T.O. Building, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Principal Accountant General (A And E) Chhattisgarh, Baloda Bazar Road, P.O. Vidhan Sabha, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Santoshi Yadav, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Utsav Mahiswar, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 3 : Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advocate. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 29/10/2025 RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “I. To kindly direct the respondents to release all the dues payable of the petitioner including gratuity, Group insurance scheme, family benefit fund, Sewa Samman Nidhi and other benefits. ii. To kindly award interest on the delayed payment. iii. To kindly make any other order that may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of this case including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present matter has already been duly redressed by the concerned authorities, as the entire amount of General Provident Fund (GPF) payable to the petitioner has been released and paid. In view of the aforesaid development, the petitioner has no subsisting grievance and, therefore, does not wish to pursue the present petition any further. 3. No objection has been raised from other sides. 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat