1 2026:CGHC:3264 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 249 of 2026 Mrs. Nanda Dr. Anil Khakharia W/o Dr. Anil Khakharia Aged About 54 Years R/o Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, Department Of Energy, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited (CSPDCL) Through Its Managing Director, Danganiya, Raipur (C.G.) 3 - Managing Director Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Danganiya, Raipur (C.G.) 4 - Director (RA And Commercial) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Raipur (C.G.) 5 - Executive Director (RA And PM) Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Raipur (C.G.) 6 - Senior Law Officer Chhattisgarh State Power Distribution Company Limited, Raipur (C.G.) 7 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of New And Renewable Energy (Mnre), Government Of India, New Delhi 8 - Mrs. Madhu Agrawal Proprietor, R/o House No. 0030, Prime Ispat House, Pyarelal Agrawal Marg, Ramsagar Para, Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr. Niraj Baghel, Advocate For Respondent No.1/State : Mr. Keshav Gupta, Govt. Advocate For Respondents 2 to 6 : Mr. Shailesh Tiwari, Advocate For Respondent No.7/UOI : Ms. Annapurna Tiwari & Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan. Sr. Standing counsel BINI PRADEEP Digitally signed by BINI PRADEEP Date: 2026.01.21 17:54:41 +0530 2 (Hon’ble Shri Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Order on Board 20.01.2026 1. The petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking following relief(s):- 10.1 Allow the transfer of the Letter of Award (LoA) in favour of the Petitioner, Mrs. Nanda Dr. Anil Khakharia, under the PM-KUSUM Scheme; 10.2 Direct the Respondents to grant subsidy and extend all benefits admissible under the PM-KUSUM Scheme to the Petitioner; 10.3 Pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice. 2. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission of the Court to withdraw this petition. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection on the above prayer. 4. On due consideration, prayer is allowed and learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to withdraw this petition. 5. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- (Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi) Judge Bini