Rahul Nayak Minor Another v. Delhi Public School Society And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPCR No. 6866 of 2008

1. Rahul Nayak (Minor), Through his father Dr. Harish Nayak, Aged about 49 years, S/o N.P. Nayak, Niharika Road, Korba CG

2. Dr. Harish Nayak, aged about 49 years, S/o N.P. Nayak Niharika Road, Korba CG ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Delhi Public School Society (A Society Registered under the societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973) Through its Chairman, Delhi Public School, Staff Flats F-Block East of Kailash New Delhi

2. Delhi Public School Through Its Principal, NTPC Branch, Jamnipali, Korba CG

3. Statish Sharma S/o Bishambher Dayal Principal, Delhi Public School, NTPC Branch, Jamnipali, Korba CG

4. Shailendra Singh S/o B.B. Singh Physical Training Instructor/teacher, Delhi Public School, NTPC Branch, Jamnipali, Korba CG

5. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Chief Secretary, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur CG

6. Secretary Department Of School Education, State Of Chhattisgarh, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur CG

7. Collector, Korba CG

8. Superintendent Of Police Korba, Distt.-Korba CG

9. Town Inspector Police Station Darri, Distt.-Korba CG 10.National Commission For Protection Of Child Rights, 5th Floor, Chandralok Bhawan, 36-Janpath, New Delhi

11. Secretary Department Of Law And Legislation, Dks Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur Cg 12.National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd.(A Government of India Enterprise) Corporate Center, Scope Complex NTPC Bhawan, 7-Institutional Area Lodi Road, New Delhi -110003 13.Union Of India Through The Secretary, Ministry Of Human Resources Development, New Delhi ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

None appears For State/respondents No. 5 to 9 & 11 :

Shri R.K. Mishra, Dy. A.G.

For other respondents :

None appears

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 23/08/2018 After perusal of the pleadings of the parties, it is found that the petitioner a minor had filed this petition seeking a direction to the State authority as well as police authority to take penal action and other remedial measures in the matter of the corporal punishment given to the petitioner. From the submission of learned Deputy Advocate General and the reply of the State and the police authority, it is found that on the complaint of the petitioner, a criminal case was registered against respondent No.4 by the police authority. Moreover, enquiry was also directed by respondent No.10 and the authority were seized of the matter at the time when the reply was filed. 2.

As there is no one to prosecute the matter, at this stage, this Court does not consider it necessary to keep the matter pending. Therefore, the petition is finally disposed off.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha