Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 57838 (CHH)

JITENDRA KUMAR GAHWAI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/4332/2023 · 2025-10-30

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:53445 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4332 of 2023 1 - Jitendra Kumar Gahwai S/o. Shri Chhotelal Gahwai, Aged About 36 Years R/o. Infront Of Basant Complex, New Sarkanda Sipat Road, Bilaspur Tahsil And District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Health And Family Welfare, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District Raipur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Divisional Joint Director Health Services, Regional Health And Family Welfare Services, Centre Parishar, Seepat Road Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Chief Medical And Health Officer, District - Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devesh G. Kela, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Dashrath Prajapati, Panel Lawyer. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 31/10/2025 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1) That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Respondent no. I to 3 to place all record connected with the matter for the perusal of the Hon'ble Court 10.2) That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct respondent authorities particularly Respondent No.3 to release the salary of the petitioner. 10.3) That such other relief's as the Hon'ble Court deems fit in the circumstances of the case be granted to the Petitioner.” 2. 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. 3. Learned counsel for the State/respondent does not dispute the same and has no objection to the petition being dismissed as infructuous. 4. In view of the above, and since nothing further survives for adjudication, the petition is dismissed as infructuous. 5. However, liberty is granted to the respondent State authorities to pass appropriate orders in respect of transfer of the petitioner, in case exigency arises, without being influenced by this order. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat