Samaru Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2025 Latest Caselaw 3998 Chatt

Chattisgarh High Court

Samaru Yadav vs State Of Chhattisgarh on 28 April, 2025

                                        1




 Digitally
 signed by                                               2025:CGHC:19038
 RAMESH
 KUMAR VATTI                                                             NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR


                             WPL No. 106 of 2019

  •   Samaru Yadav S/o Shri Konda Yadav Aged About 54 Years R/o Village
      Cherkabhata, Post- Bhaisakshar, Tehsil- Kota, District- Bilaspur,
      Chhattisgarh
                                                          ... Petitioner
                                     Versus
  1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Labour Commissioner, Labour
     Department, Office Of The Labour Commissioner, Block-3, 2nd Floor,
     Indravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh
  2. Deputy Labour Commissioner (DLC) Office Of The Labour
     Commissioner, Block-3, 2nd Floor, Indravati Bhavan, Naya Raipur,
     District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh
  3. Municipal Corporation Bilaspur, Through Commissioner, Nagar Palika
     Nigam Office, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh
  4. Garden-In-Chanrge Nagar Palika Nigam, Bilaspur, District : Bilaspur,
     Chhattisgarh
                                                                 ... Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, Advocate

For Respondents No. 1 & 2/ : Mr. Lav Sharma, Panel Lawyer State

For Respondents No. 3 & 4 : Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board

28/04/2025

1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):-

"10.1 To allow the instant petition and issue appropriate writ/order/judgment directing the Respondent No. 2 to decide the application of the petitioner dated 11/08/2017 (received on 15/09/2017) under Section 34 of the ID Act, 1947 (ANNEXURE P/1) in accordance with law and as per provisions of ID Act, 1947 within a period of 30 days.

10.2 To grant any other relief(s) / order(s) / direction(s) in favour of petitioner, which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."

2. At the very outset, Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner would submit that by efflux of time, the

present petition has become infructuous, therefore, this petition may be

dismissed being rendered infructuous.

3. No objection from other side.

4. Recording the statement made by Mr. Anshuman Shrivastava, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner, this petition is dismissed being

rendered infructuous.

Sd/-

(Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge

vatti