Dr. Aditya Kumar Rajwade vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2022 Latest Caselaw 340 Chatt

                                     1

                (Proceedings through video conferencing)
                                                                      NAFR
           HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                     Writ Petition (C) No. 1054 of 2020


1.   Dr. Aditya Kumar Rajwade, S/o Shri Sukhlal Rajwade, aged about
     33 years, Posted at District Hospital Surajpur, District Surajpur,
     Chhattisgarh.
2.   Rajesh Kumar Shresth, S/o Late Shri Dil Bahadur Shrestha, aged
     about 40 years, Posted at Primary Health Centre Dharmpur Block
     Pratapur, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.
3.   Dr. Pramod Rathore, S/o Shri Bheshaj Lal Rathore, aged about 33
     years, Centre Odgi, Block Odgi, District Surajpur, Chhattisgarh.
4.   Dr. Pranay Gourav Shukla, S/o Shri C.L. Shukla, aged about 33
     years, Posted at Health Centre Keshkal, Block Keshkal, District
     Kondagaon, Chhattisgarh.
5.   Dr. Aditya Sinha, S/o Shri Kanhaiya Lal Sinha, aged about 34
     years, Posted at Health Centre Magarlod, District Dhmatari,
     Chhattisgarh.
6.   Dr. Nitin Gupta, S/o Shri M.K. Gupta, aged about 30 years, Posted
     at Ambagarh Chowki, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh.
                                                             ---- Petitioners
                                  Versus
1.   State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Health and Family
     Welfare Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar,
     Naya Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
2.   The Director Medical Education Old Nurse Hospital, D.K.S. Bhawan
     Parisar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
3.   The Director Health Services Indravati Bhawan, Capital Complex,
     New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
4.   The Medical Council of India Through Its Chairman, Pocket-14,
     Phase-I, Sector-8, Dwarka, New Delhi
                                                           ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Petitioners : Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, Senior Advocate. For Respondents No. 1 to 3 : Mr. Vikram Sharma, Deputy Government Advocate.

For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Ranbir Singh Marhas, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

20.01.2022

Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, learned senior counsel for the petitioners

submits that because of subsequent developments, the writ petition has

become infructuous.

2. Also heard Mr. Vikram Sharma, learned Deputy Government

Advocate appearing for respondents No. 1 to 3 and Mr. Ranbir Singh

Marhas, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 4.

3. The writ petition is disposed of as infructuous.

                              Sd/-                                      Sd/-
                      (Arup Kumar Goswami)                     (N.K. Chandravanshi)
                         Chief Justice                                 Judge
Brijmohan