PémTIONER f i { y > x § f § § ‘ I ‘Cij/aai’ r BILASPwCG)l WRIT PETIfION ( s )No. 2% /2o@ /6. about 57K years, Brijnayak g Singh Assistant ESub /Udai Pal Singh Bhadauria, aged son of Inspector, B,aloda bazéar, Distt : Raipur ( C G) VERSUS ,71‘ RES‘PONDENTS } State of Chttiattisgarh through the Secretary, iDepartment of Home Affairs, Dau‘ Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Inquiry Officer, Mahasamund ( C G ) . Shri Dipansh’u Kabra, Former Superintendent of Police, Distt : Mahasamund ( Present! Raigarh ) The City Superintendent of Police, Distt : mahasamund ( C G ) Prem Kant Awasthy, Former Station House Officer, P.S. Mahasamund (CG) ‘at present posted as R.l.' Poiice Line, mahasamund (CG) Dau Ram Sagar, Head Constable, P.S. Mahasamund, Mahasamund (CG) \ Constable, P.S. Distt: Mahasamund (CG) Distt: late Bhadauria, P.S. BEFORE THE HIGH CbURT OF C ‘H‘ATTISGARH AT l xwuut; wtagzkA- m1“..w.s t ‘l is *“Mz w y S.P., Krishna Kumar Verma, Head , Mahasamund, . Superintendent of Police-Cum- District . . /é. Shiv Charan Netam, Constable, P.S. Mahasamund, ‘ Distt: Mahasamund (CG) /9. Chhedi Lal Tiwari, Head Constable,P.S. Mahasamund, Distt: Mahasamund ( C G ) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE g226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ' " ’b. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.216 OF‘2008 (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of lndia) Single Bench : Hon’bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present .- Shri T K Tlwarr Advocate forthe petitioner Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on thus 12‘“ day ofApnl 2010) By this petition, the petitioner sought quashing of charge sheet as well as the departmentai enquiry proceedings initiated against him on the basrs of said charge sheet During pendency of the petition on 7 5 2008 the respondent authorities were directed to proceed wrth the departmental enquiry, but fnai order w0uld not be passed tiii the next date of hearing On 22 7 2008 the next date of hearing the order dated 7 5-2008 was not extended Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the , departmentat enquiry has been concluded and resulted into imposition of punishment of compulsory retirement. Thus, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication and the same has become infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. However, on the request of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to raise all the grounds whatever is available, if the punishment order is challenged, if so advised. 1. 8d]- \t Gowri l I Judge V I Satish K. Agnihotri W4 PETITIONER Udai Pal Singh Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh &