Dismissed

Gopal Sharan Sharma, v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC6 Aug 2018WPS/6318/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a pending writ petition challenging an order regarding the petitioner's official accommodation and rent, noting that the petitioner's retirement and the reduction of rent rendered further adjudication unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is dismissed with reservation of the petitioner's right to raise a dispute if any grievance survives.

Gopal Sharan Sharma, Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors. — Chhattisgarh HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 6318 of 2010

¶4

Gopal Sharan Sharma, Aged about 58 years, S/o. Shri R.S. Sharma, Assistant Accounts Officer, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶5

---- Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary to the Government of Chhattisgarh, Nagariya Niyojan-avam-Vikas Vibhag, Mantralaya, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

¶8

Municipal Corporation, Through the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Korba, District Korba, Chhattisgarh

¶9

Municipal Corporation, Through the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh

¶10

----Respondents

¶11

For Petitioner	: None
For State	: Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, Panel Lawyer
For Respondent No.2	: Mr. B.D. Guru, Advocate
For Respondent No.3	: Mr. Adil Minhaj,Advocate

¶12

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board

¶13

06/08/2018

¶14

The challenge in the present writ petition was to the notice (Annexure P/1) dated 05.10.2010, whereby the petitioner was directed to vacate the official accommodation i.e. Quarter No. F-02 allotted to him and also to pay the monthly rent at the market rate of Rs.15,900/- for occupation of the same beyond the permitted limits.

¶15

The said writ petition was filed in the year 2010. The said order was issued in the light of the services of the petitioner being transferred from Korba to Bilaspur.

¶16

Meanwhile, the respondents have filed their return and have enclosed Annexure R/1 whereby the impugned order in the present writ petition

¶17

¶18

dated 05.10.2010 has been modified to the extent that the amount of market rent payable has been reduced from Rs.15,900/- to Rs.6,375/-.

¶19

Perusal of the record would also show that the petitioner also has in between retired from service and as such the grievance of the petitioner by now must have been redressed that is the reason perhaps, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.

¶20

Given the aforesaid development, which has transpired subsequent to the filing of the writ petition, there does not appear to be any further adjudication required in the present dispute.

¶21

The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed, reserving the right of the petitioner for raising dispute, in case if any grievance still survives.

¶22

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge

¶23

Ved

Gopal Sharan Sharma, v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Sharan Sharma, v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Balram Prasad Shukla Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Umesh Kumar Rathore Vs Union Of India and Ors.

Anand Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Onkar Singh Tamarkar Vs State of C.G. and Ors.

Suresh Mishra Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Rajendra Kumar Verma Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others