1 2026:CGHC:3829 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 298 of 2026 1 - Vivek Madan S/o Late Shri Subhashchand Madan Aged About 45 Years R/o Vaishalinagar, Kaurinbhata, Ward No. 45, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of School Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Nava Raipur, District - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Vikas Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - District Education Officer Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh 4 - District Project Officer Literacy Mission, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ... Respondents (Cause title, as taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Mr. Prasoon Agrawal, Advocate For State/Respondents : Mr. Anadi Sharma, Panel Lawyer. (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 22/01/2026 1. Heard. 2. This petition has been preferred by petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs:- RUKHSAR BANO Digitally signed by RUKHSAR BANO Date: 2026.01.24 11:25:12 +0530 2 “10.1 The Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent to give a copy of the service book of the deceased father of the petitioner, within 15 days, from the date of the order, in the interest of justice. 10.2 Any other relief/relief’s which Hon’ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the instant case.” 3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing for the State-respondents would submit that for similar relief, Ms. Vineeta Madan (sister of petitioner) had filed Civil Suit bearing No.61A/2021 against the State, which was dismissed by the Sixth Additional Judge, Rajnandgaon to the Court of First Civil Judge, Class-II, Rajnandgaon. The appeal preferred by Ms. Vineeta Madan bearing Civil Appeal No.59A/2023 has also been dismissed by the judgment dated 06.01.2025, therefore, the present petition is liable to be rejected. 4. On this, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press instant petition, as for the same cause of action, petitioner’s sister has already filed the civil suit before the competent civil court. 5. Since, petitioner’s sister has already availed the remedy before the Civil Court for the same relief, therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable, hence, the same is dismissed. 6. Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, stands disposed of. No order as to cost(s). Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Rukhsar