Shivcharan v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition No.

of 20 0 5 Shivcharan, S/o. Chandra Pratap, Aged about 27 years, R/o Village Nayabandh, Vikas Khand Bataul, Tahsil Sitapur, District Sarguja (C.G.) ---- Petitioners

Versus

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

2. The Collector, Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

3. The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

4. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Batauli, Distict Surguja (C.G.)

5. Rajeev Kumar, S/o Jagat Ram, Aged about 28 years, R/o Village Birimkela, Tehsil Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

6. Rajkumar Sonwani, S/o. Loknath, Aged about 35 years, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Birimkela, Tahsil Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

7. Ramedhar, S/o Bhikalu, Aged about 30 years, Panch, Gram Panchayat Birimkela, Tahsil Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

8. Kadakram, S/o. Gopi, Aged about 45 years, Gram Sahayak, Gram Panchayat Birimkela, Tahsil Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.)

9. Budhanram, S/o. Unknown, Aged about 30 years, Member of Selection Committee of Samvida Shikshak Grade-III, R/o. Sitapur, District Surguja (C.G.) ---- Respondents For Petitioner : Shri Sunil Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Shri Arvind Dubey, PL For Respondents No. 4, 6 & 8 : Shri Arun Sao, Advocate. For Respondent No. 5 : Shri Sunil Tripathi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board / 1 0/201

(1) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this

writ petition is covered by order passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3664 of 2005 {Sumit Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others}, decided on 24th December, 2014 , therefore, instant writ petition may be disposed of in terms of paragraphs 2 and 3 of the aforesaid order, which read as under:- " 2. The initial appointment being for one year, 2003-2004 and that period having expired long back, the interim order granted has become infructuous.

3. All other issues including any subsequent developments are left open for consideration at a later stage, if necessary"

(2) In view of above, the writ petition stands disposed of in terms of paragraphs 2 & 3 of the order passed passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 3664 /2005 in the matter of Sumit Kumar (supra). Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-