1 2026:CGHC:502 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4100 of 2023 1 - Radheshyam Aursa, S/o Mr. Sakalu Ram Aursa Aged About 36 Years Post Assistant Professor, Posted At Govt. Veer Gaindsingh Collage, Pakhanjore, Block Koylibeda, Distt. Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Secretary Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Director Panchayat And Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 4 - District Education Officer District Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 5 - Zila Panchayat Uttar Baster Kanker, Through It Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat District Uttar Bastar Kanker (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Bhavika Kotecha, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Arpit Agrawal, Panel Lawyer. For Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Ghanshyam Patel, Advocate. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 05/01/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “i)That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to direct the respondents to release immeidately, the arrears of increment and further please to direct the respondents to release the arrears of Samayman-Vetanman from Feburary 2020 to October 2020. ii)That the Hon'ble Court may kindly be please to direct the respondents to decide the representation of the petitioner within a period of 45 days. iii) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner and the cost of the petition may be awarded in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for both the petitioner as well as the respondents jointly submit that the grievance raised by the petitioner no longer survives for consideration, inasmuch as the issue complained of has already been duly redressed by the competent authorities. It is further submitted that the arrears towards Samayman–Vetanman have since been released in favour of the petitioner; however, the said payment was made after some delay and not within the stipulated or expected time 3 frame. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 4. Considering the aforesaid submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the respective parties, and having regard to the fact that the grievance raised by the petitioner has already been duly addressed and redressed to their satisfaction, no substantive cause of action survives for adjudication in the present proceedings; consequently, the petition filed by the petitioner has rendered itself infructuous and does not warrant any further consideration on merits. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed being infructous. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat