Shiv Kumar Jaiswal v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No.2071 of 2010 Shiv Kumar Jaiswal S/o Shri Satyanarayan Prasad Jaiswal, aged about 56 years, R/o Jaiswal Villa, Main Road, Korba CG ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Industries, DKS Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (CG)

2. Chhattisgarh State Industrial Development Corporation, through its General Manager, Bhartiya Jeevan Bima Commercial Complex, Pandri, Raipur (CG)

3. Managing Director, C.G. State Industrial Development Corporation, Bhartiya Jeevan Bima Commercial Complex, Pandri, Raipur (CG) --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Mr. P.R. Patankar, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Mr. Alok Bakshi, Additional A.G.

For Respondent/CSIDC :

Mr. Ayaz Naved, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order on Board 05/08/2020 Heard.

1.

During the pendency of the present writ petition, it is reported, that the petitioner died on 02.01.2019.

2.

Though there is an application for substitution of legal representatives of deceased petitioner, during course of arguments, it transpired that the relief sought by this petitioner in the writ petition was to provide him limited protection of three months to dispose off the plant, machinery and raw materials situated at Siltara Industrial Area, Raipur. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly stated that upon instructions from legal representatives, he has to say that so far, the plant and machinery have not been disturbed and are still lying, though there was no interim order in favour of the petitioner.

4.

In this situation, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the petitioner's plant and machinery have remained situated at site in the last 10 years without any disturbance, therefore, no further orders are required to be passed in this petition, at this stage.

5.

Having considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and further taking into consideration that the scope and extent of relief sought by the petitioner in the writ petition, I am not inclined to proceed further in the matter and this petition is disposed off at this stage without further proceeding. In case, the legal representatives of the deceased petitioner consider it necessary in view of any subsequent development, they may revive the petition along with an application for substitution of legal representatives of deceased original petitioner.

6.

It would be open for the legal representatives of the petitioner to move application for further extension upto month of September, 2020, which may receive consideration taking into consideration pandemic situation. 7.

The present writ petition is closed.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha