← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/2195/2014non prosecution

Dharmendra Rao v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS

2015-10-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2195 of 2014 • Dharmendra Rao S/o Shri Shivaji Rao Aged About 42 Years R/o Village Ganiyari, Post Ganiyari, Tahsil Takhatpur, Dist Bilaspur, Cg ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Principal Secretary, General Administration, Mahanadi Bahwna, Naya Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

2. State Of C.G. Through Collector, Bilaspur, Dist Bilaspur, Cg

3. C.G. State Krishi Vipdan Board, Through Managing Director, C.G. State Krishi Vipdan Board, Mahandi Bahwna, Naya Raipur, Dist Raipur, Cg

4. Executive Engineer Mandi Board, Near Old Pratap Talkes, Doctor's Colony Bilaspur, Dist Bilaspur, Cg

5. Joint Director C.G. State Krishi Vipdan Board, Near Old Pratap Talkes, Dosctor Colony, Bilaspur, Dist Bilaspur, Cg

6. Krishi Upaj Mandi Committee Through Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi, Committee, Near Old Pratap Talkes, Doctos Colony, Bilaspur, Dist Bilaspur, Cg ---- Respondents And WPC No. 2174 Of 2014 • Shyam Kashyap S/o Late Shri Sambhu Kashyap Aged About 49 Years R/o Chhattisgarh Complex Old Bus Stand Road Post And Tahsil Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur C.G.

---- Petitioner Vs

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, General Administration, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, Dist Raipur (C.G.)

2. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Collector, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur C.G.

3. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through Managing Director C.G. State Krishi Vipdan Board Raipur C.G.

4. Tobias Toppo Executive Engineer Mandi Board Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur C.G.

5. J.L. Sawanni Joint Director C.G. State Krishi Vipdan Board, Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur C.G.

6. Ashok Dubey Secretary, Krishi Upaj Mandi Committee, Bilaspur, Dist. Bilaspur, C.G.

---- Respondents For Petitioners None Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board By 26/10/2015 Since there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners even in two rounds, this Court is left with no other option except to dismiss these petitions for want of prosecution.

Accordingly, the writ petitions are dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala