Ramvilas Sharma And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO. 6564 OF 2011 1.

Ramvilas Sharma, S/o Shri Ramhit Sharma, aged about 56 years, R/o Mishra Gali, Gopalpur, Surajpur, Surguja, District Surguja (C.G.) 2.

Ramesh Kumar Sinha, S/o Shri Mangal Kishore Sinha, aged about 47 years, R/o Joda Peepal Kedarpur, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3.

N.S. Paikra, S/o Shri S.P. Singh Paikra, aged about 42 years, R/o Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Petitioners versus 1.

State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Panchayat & Gramin Vikas Vibhag, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 2.

Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 3.

Sub Divisional Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 4.

Chief Executive Officer, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.) 5.

Chief Executive, Janpad Panchayat, Surajpur, District Surguja (C.G.) ... Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. Manoj Paranjpe, Advocate.

For Respondent-State :

Mr. Chandresh Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer.

For Respondent No.5 :

Mr. R.S. Baghel, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 11/07/2018 1.

Challenge in the present is to the order dated 11.10.2011, Annexure P-1, whereby the Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Surguja-Ambikapur had ordered for registration of FIR against the Petitioners and other similarly placed persons.

2.

The Petitioners also have an interim order in their favour in the present writ petition, vide order dated 9.11.2011.

3.

Pending the petition and the interim order, it has been informed at the bar that the impugned order has been given effect to and an FIR was also lodged wherein the Petitioner's name is also reflected in Crime No. 263/2015 registered at Police Station Surajpur, District Surajpur.

4.

Since the impugned order has been since acted upon, this Court is of the opinion that nothing further remains to be adjudicated upon in the instant matter and the present writ petition in its present form deserves to be and is accordingly dismissed as having become infructuous.

5.

The disposal of the writ petition as having become infructuous would not preclude the right of the Petitioner in challenging any subsequent action which he is aggrieved of.

6.

The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed as having become infructuous. Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) /sharad/ Judge