Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3108 (CHH)

JASRAJ SARDUL v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/1732/2025 · 2026-02-04

Shri Parth Prateem Sahu

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:6505 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1732 of 2025 1 - Jasraj Sardul S/o Bhagilal Sardul Aged About 43 Years R/o Village And Post Banskot, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh --- Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Cooperative Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Capital Complex, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Collector Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 3 - Assistant Registrar (Cooperative Socities) Kondagaon, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 4 - Nodal Officer District Cooperative Central Bank Maryadit, Jagdalpur, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 5 - Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Banskot, Registration No. 318, Through Its President/ Authorized Officer Of Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit, Banskot, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh 6 - President/ Authorized Officer Of Aadim Jati Sewa Sahakari Samiti Maryadit Banskot, District Kondagaon Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner : Ms. Apoorva Ghore, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Arpan Verma, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Aditya Tiwari, Panel Lawyer For Respondent No. 5 & 6 : Mr. Raza Ali, Advocate SB: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge ORDER ON BOARD 2 05/02/2026 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following relief(s):- “10.1. That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ/writs, direction/directions, order/orders quashing the impugned order of dismissal dated 25.02.2025 (Annexure P/1) and respondent authorities may kindly be directed to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief(s), which is deemed fit and proper in the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according to her instructions, petitioner has been reinstated in service and therefore, in view of the relief claimed, the writ petition has rendered infructuous. 3. In view of the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as rendered infructuous. 4. Certified copy as per rules. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Dey SHUBHAM DEY Digitally signed by SHUBHAM DEY Date: 2026.02.06 11:49:50 +0530