^ z^ COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT . RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. & SUNIL SSNHA, J. HQ. 80 of 2007 R.C. Verma S/o Shri B.C.L. Verma, Aged about 51 years Lecturer (IVIaths) Govt. Higher Secondary School, Manpur, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) APPELL.ANT r Versus 1. State of C.G. Through Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare (S.C. S.T.,O.B.C. & minority) Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. Commlssioner Tribai Welfare (S.C. S.T., O.B.C. & minority) Dist-Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner Tribai Weifare, (S.C, S.T, O.B.C. B Minority), Dist - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 4. Sub-Dsvisional Officer (Revenue) Mohia, Dist - Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 5. Principai, Govemment Higher Secondary Schooi, Manpur, Dist Rajnandgaon (C.G.) 2 (1) of Chhattlsaarh Hlah Coyrt to Act'. 2006 157-10 (A) 2 Niah Covrt of Chhattisaarh Rules, Present: Ms. Deepaii Pandey, learned counset for the appeiiant. Shri N.K. Agrawai, iearned DeputyA.G. forthe respondents. 246 JUDGIVEENT ith The foilowing judgment of the Court v^as passed by s,CJ. Heard learned counsel forthe partles. 2. AppelEant - R.C. Verma has filed this writ appeal against the order 05-02-2007, in W.P. No.2736/2006. 3. Appeljant/petitloner fi!ed the writ petltion for the foliowlng rellefs: "L That tiiis Hon'bie Coui-t may kindly 'oe pleased to ca!l the entire records for perusal. El. That thls Hon'bie Court may kindiy be pieased to quash the order 24.05.2006 Annexure p/1. Any other v/rit, dlrection, order may kindly be whlch ths Hon'bie Court deems fit sn the and circu'mstances of the case. Cost of the petition and compensation of injury caused." ISI. ' IV. 4. The pstltioner, in substance, was seeking quashing of the ordsr dated 25-04-2006 (Annexure P/1) whereby the petitioner v/as piaced under suspension. 5. Shrl N.K. Agrawai, learned Deputy Advocate General for the respondents refemng to Annexure R/1 flied aiong with the appllcatlon 19-03-2008 submits that the departmenta! enquiry against the appeiiant has already been conduded and punlshment of stoppage of one annua! grade increment has been imposed on the appellant. The learned counsei further submitted ?A1 1 that as the appellant's suspension has been revoked, this writ appea! now has become Infructuous as the appeiEant had fiied the writ petition against the order of suspenslon onEy. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant couEd not dispute the above factual deveEopment In the matter during the pendency of the appeal. 7. in thls view of the matter, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the appeilant to avai! the remedles which may be available to the appeilant under the relevant provision of !aw against the order dated 03-03-2008 (Annexure R/1) vvhereby punishmsnt of stoppage. of one annual grade Increment has besn imposed on the appeilant. Sd/- Chief Justice JL Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge -y