Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 16]

Chattisgarh High Court

Ashish Kumar Chauksey vs The State Of Chhattisgarh And Ors. 9 ... on 20 August, 2018

Author: Prashant Kumar Mishra

Bench: Prashant Kumar Mishra

                                                                               NAFR
                   HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                               WPC No. 1031 of 2014
   1. Ashish Kumar Chauksey S/o Shri Ashok Kumar Chauksey Aged About 28
      Years R/o C/o S.R. Sahu, V.V. Vihar Colony, House No. 30, Gali No. 3,
      Near Karishma Complex, Raipur, P.S. Shankar Nagar, Civil And Revenue
      Distt. Raipur C.G.

                                                                       ---- Petitioner
                                       Versus
   1. The State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher
      Education Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Mantralaya, New Raipur, PS Rakhi,
      Distt. Raipur C.G.

   2. The Director, Higher Education, Raipur C.G.

   3. The Chancellor, Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar
      Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, Post Office Sunder Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur
      C.G.

   4. The Vice Chancellor Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar
      Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, Post Office Sunder Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur
      C.G.

   5. The Registrar, Kushabhau Thakre, Patrakarita Avam Jansanchar
      Vishwavidyalaya, Kathadih, Post Office Sunder Nagar, Raipur, Distt. Raipur
      C.G.

                                                                   ---- Respondent



For Petitioner                     Shri Sanjay Dewangan, Advocate
For Respondent/State               Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Addl. Adv. General
For Respondent No.3 to 5           Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, Advocate


                                  Order On Board

                                         By

                            Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.

20/08/2018

1. After arguing for some time, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the writ petition has become rendered infructuous by efflux of time.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous.

Sd/-

Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Gowri