Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3337 (CHH)

PREM KUMAR BADA v. GOVT. OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/2995/2023 · 2026-01-01

Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:187 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2995 of 2023 1 - Prem Kumar Bada S/o Late Amrusbada Aged About 54 Years Occupation Driver, R.T.O. Ambikapur, R/o M.G. Road, Behind Punjab Garden, Shubhashnagar Police Station Gandhinagar And Tahsil Ambikapur District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Govt. Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Transport, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar, New Mantralaya, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). 2 - Regional Transport Officer Office, Sarganwa, Pratappur Road Ambikapur, District Surguja (Chhattisgarh) Pin 497001. 3 - Transport Commissioner Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Pin 492002. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Sangeeta Soni, Advocate. For Respondent(s)/State : Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G. RAGHVENDRA JAT Digitally signed by RAGHVENDRA JAT 2 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 02/01/2026 1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:- “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue notices to the respondents returnable within early date of hearing. 10.2. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide for proper entry of G.P.F. (Government Provident Fund) amount from his monthly salary in his service passbook and to provide Rs. 5,00,000 from his G.P.F. Account for the marriage of Petitioner's Son. 10.3. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioner vide Annexure P-2, within stipulated period in accordance with law. 10.4. Any other relief, which the Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper, may kindly be granted in favour of the petitioner.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner after arguing for some time seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this petition. 3 3. No objection has been raised from other side. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Raghu Jat