Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 3634 (CHH)

SMT. LAXMI DHRUW (NETAM) v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

WPS/1427/2022 · 2026-04-05

Shri Rakesh Mohan Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:15524 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1427 of 2022 * - Smt. Laxmi Dhruw (Netam) W/o Shri Ankit Dhruw Aged About 32 Years R/o Avantika Colony, Jagdalpur, Tahsil- Jagdalpur, District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Petitioner Versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Naya Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director, Directorate Of Public Instructions, Nawa Raipur, Atal Nagar, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director, Education Division, Bastar, District- Jagdalpur (C.G.) 4 - The District Education Officer District- Bastar (C.G.) 5 - Shishupal Sahu Posted As Teacher (L.B.), Govt. Middle School Chandela, Block Lohandiguda, District- Bastar (C.G.) 6 - Keshav Das, Posted As Teacher (L.B.) Govt. Middle School, Kanker, Block- Lohandiguda, District- Bastar (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Vikash A. Shrivastava, Advocate For Respondents No. 1 to 4 : Mr. Vivek Siddharth Ojha, Panel Lawyer Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 06/04/2026 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue an appropriate writ/ order, thereby setting-aside-quashing the impugned promotion order dated 07.02.2022 (Annexure P/1) so far it relates to promotion of respondents no. 5 & 6 and further be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to grant Digitally signed by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI Date: 2026.04.07 12:26:28 +0530 2 promotion to the petitioner to the post of Teacher (L.B.) from the date of promotion of junior, with all consequential benefits. 10.2 That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that by efflux of time, the present petition has become infructuous, therefore, this petition may be dismissed being rendered infructuous. 3. No objection from other side. 4. Recording the statement made by Mr. Vikash A. Shrivatstava, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, this petition is dismissed being rendered infructuous. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti