Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 8030 (CHH)

LEELAS INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPC/1109/2021 · 2025-02-28

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2025:CGHC:10165 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 1109 of 2021 • Leela’s Institute Of Medical Sciences Through The Administrator, Leela’s Institute Of Medical Sciences Run By Leela’s Foundation For Education And Health Society 54, Shanti Vihar Colony, Dagania Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary To The Govt. Of Chhattisgarh Department Of Medical Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, PS Rakhi, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. The Director, Directorate Of Medical Education, Old Nursing Hostel, Mantralaya Campus, Raipur District 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, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : 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for the petitioner would submit that grievance of the petitioner has already been redressed as order impugned has been withdrawn by the respondent authorities and the petitioner was permitted to take admission by virtue of interim order; thus, he would pray to withdraw this writ petition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 petitioner. 3. Recording the submission made by counsel for the petitioner, the instant petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti