Shriram Dahariya v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3469 of 2014

1. R.B. Shivlahare S/o Shri Ram Khilawan Shivlahare Aged About 50 years Presently Working On The Post Of Sub Engineer Water Resources Department Sub Division Premnagar Division Surajpur Distt. Surajpur C.G.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Water Resource Department, Mahanadi Bhawan , New Raipur C.G.

2. Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department Division Surajpur Distt. Surajpur C.G.

3. Sub Divisional Officer Water Resource Department Sub Division Premnagar Distt. Surajpur C.G.

---- Respondent And WPS No. 377 Of 2015

1. Shriram Dahariya S/o Shri B.P. Dahariya Aged About 56 years R/o Qtr. N O. G-48, New Bairaj Colony, P.S. Civil Lines Rudri Dhamtari, District Dhamtari C.G.

---- Petitioner Vs

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Water Resources Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur Distt. Raipur C.G.

2. The Secretary Department Of Water Resources Mantralaya Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur C.G.

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Water Management Sub Division No. 8, Gurur, District Balod C.G.

---- Respondent And WPS No. 3965 Of 2014

1. Shriram Dahariya S/o Shri B.P.Dahariya Aged About 56 years R/o Qtr. No. G-48, New Bairaj Colony, Ps Civil Line, Rudri, Dhamtari, Distt Dhamtari, Cg ---- Petitioner Vs

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

2. Secretary, Department Of Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

3. Sub Divisional Officer, Water Management Sub Division No. 8, Gurur, Dist Balod, Cg ---- Respondent For respective Shri N.N. Roy & Shri A.N. Pandey, Advocates Petitioners For Respondent/State Shri J.K. Gilda, Adv. General with Shri P.K.

Bhaduri, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 28/07/2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

1.

At the very outset, learned Advocate General appearing for the State would submit that the orders under challenge in these petitions have already been cancelled by the State, and, as such, the writ petitions have been rendered infructuous, to which learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners have no objection.

2.

Accordingly, all the writ petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous.

Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Gowri