1 / 2 2026:CGHC:942 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 14213 of 2025 Virendra Kumar S/o Shri Karan Singh Aged About 31 Years Occupation Daily Wager Unskilled, Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation Branch- Korba District- Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Food Civil Supplies And Consumer Protection, Shastri Bhawan, Dr, Rajendra Prasad Road, New Delhi. 2 - Managing Director, Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, Head Quarter New Raipur, District - Raipur , Chhattisgarh 3 - Branch Manager Chhattisgarh State Warehousing Corporation, Korba District- Korba Chhattisgarh ... Respondent For Petitioner : None, in the second round For Respondent no. 2 and 3 : Mr. Vinod Kumar Deshmukh, ADvocate S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge Order on Board 07/01/2026 1. In the first round of hearing, counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner made a submission that the arguing counsel is held up before another Court and sought for pass over. At that time also counsel for ALFIZA BAIG Digitally signed by ALFIZA BAIG Date: 2026.01.08 18:06:10 +0530 2 / 2 respondent has made the submission that the relief as prayed for, this writ petition has rendered infructous as decision has already been taken on the representation submitted by the petitioner along with other representations submitted by other employees on 14.07.2025 and the claim of petitioner for regularization has been rejected for the reasons assigned therein. 2. The case was passed over, however, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner in the second round. 3. Perusal of the relief as prayed for in this writ petition would show that petitioner has only prayed for considering and deciding his representation submitted by him on 15.04.2025 for his regularization in accordance with law. The respondent has placed before of this Court for perusal, copy of letter dated 06.01.2025 giving information to the petitioner about the decision on his representation, that the regularization is not possible and have also enclosed the letter/decision taken by authority. 4. In the aforementioned facts of the case, it appears that grievance raised by petitioner is redressed and nothing remains for adjudication. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed, reserving liberty with petitioner to challenge the decision of respondent authorities, if he so desires, in accordance with law. Certified copy as per rules. sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Alfiza