1 2025:CGHC:41226 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1237 of 2023 1 - Manoj Kumar Varma S/o Shri Jankilal Verma Aged About 49 Years Assistant Grade Ii, R/o Ramanujnagar, Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through, Secretary, Agriculture Department Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - The Chief Election Officer Through Election Commission Of India Chhattisgarh State Election Commission Atal Nagar Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - The Director Agriculture Department Directorate, Labhandi Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - Office Of Collector And District Election Officer Surajpur, District Surajpur Chhattisgarh 5 - The Managing Director Chhattisgarh Infrastructure Development Corporation (Transport Section), District Raipur Chhattisgarh Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 6 - Deputy Director Agriculture Office Surajpur District Surajpur Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dheerendra Pandey, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, G.A. For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Pallav Mishra, Advocate on behalf of Mr. R.N. Pusty, Advocate. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 14/08/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “(1) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 19.11.2018 (Annexure P/1) and directed to the respondent no. 2 & 4 revocation the suspension order against the petitioner and considered his representation according to rule 9 (2-a) of the Rules, 1966. And also directed to the respondents to given salary from the period of suspension. (2) Cost of the petition may also be granted to the petitioner. 3 (3) That, any other relief, which the petitioner is entitled and this Hon'ble court deems it fit may kindly, be granted to the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the afflux of time, the petition has been rendered infructuous. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents agreed with the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and has no objection. 4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat