Rajendra Kumar Singh v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1282 of 2016 • Rajendra Kumar Singh S/o Shri S.K. Singh, Aged About 50 Years S.A.S. Presently Working at Office Of Divisional Joint Director, Treasury Account and Pension, Raipur, Post and Thana, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Finance Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director, Treasury, Account and Pension Department, Indrawati Bhawan, New Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Ku. Kavita Chicholkar, Posted At Sub Treasury Office, Saraipali, District Mahasamund, Chhattisgarh.

4. Shri Jagdish Prasad Jaiswal, Posted At District Treasury Office, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

5. Shri Anil Kumar Bari, Posted At District Treasury Office, Ambikapur, District Ambikapur Surguja, Chhattisgarh.

6. Shri Sunil Kumar Pandey, Posted At Treasury Training School, Bilaspur, District

Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

7. Shri Anil Kumar Sinha, Posted At Sub Treasury Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

8. Shri Kishor Kumar Tamrakar, Posted At Sub Treasury, Janakpur, District Koriya, Chhattisgarh.

9. Shri Subeer Bhattacharya, Posted At State Election Commission, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

10.

Shri Madhukar Kashyap, Posted At District Treasury Raigarh, District- Raigarh Chhattisgarh.

11.

Shri Satish Kumar Mansagar, Posted At Indrawati Treasury Office, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

12.

Shri Nagendra Singh Thakur, Posted At Indrawati Treasury Office, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

13.

Shri Ramesh Chandra Shukla, Posted At District Treasury Balodabazar, District Balodabazar Bhatapara, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioner :- Mr. Somkant Verma, Advocate. For State/Respondents No.1 & 2 :- Mr. Soumya Rai, PL.

For Respondents No.5 to 8 & 13 :- Mr. Manoj Kumar Sinha, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board 01/09/2021

1. Proceedings of this matter have been taken up through video conferencing.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the instant writ petition has been rendered infructuous by efflux of time and no cause of action survives for consideration.

3. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

4. Before parting with record, this Court appreciates the endeavour of Mr. Somkant Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner, in ensuring disposal of old cases and the same is placed on record.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge Ankit