SMT. MUNNI BAI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh
Bench: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAKESH MOHAN PANDEY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Chhattisgarh judgment dated 2025-01-29. SMT. MUNNI BAI v. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
Digitally signed 2025:CGHC:5241 by RAMESH KUMAR VATTI NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPL No. 89 of 2019 • Smt. Munni Bai W/o Shri Lakhan Lal Sahu, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Durga Tailor, Near LIC Office, Sindhi Colony, Champa, Police Station – Champa, District Janjgir-Champa, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary, Department of Water Resource, Mantralay, Atal Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. (Respondent No. 01 was not a party before The Learned Labour Court has been impleaded as Respondent No. 1 here in as it is necessary to implead The State Government Through The Secretary of concerned Department) 2. Executive Engineer Minimata Bango Dam Division No. 3, Machadoli, Tahsil - Podi (Uproda) Koba District Korba, Chhattisgarh 3. Sub Division Officer Minimata Bango Subdivision No. 15, Etmanagar Bango, Tashil - Katghora, District Korba, Chhattisgarh ... Respondents For Petitioner : Mr.
Lav Sharma, Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Vinay Pandey, Dy. Adv. Gen. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 29/01/2025 1. The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10. 1 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the record in case of 21/IDAct/2015 (Ref) Smt. Munni Bai Vs. Executive Engineer and other. 10. 2 Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 13/04/2018 passed in case no. 21/IDAct/2015 (Ref) Smt. Munni Bai Vs. Executive Engineer and other. Or Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent authority to reinstate the petitioner with full back wages. 10. 3 Any other relief in the circumstances of the case may also be awarded. ” 2. Mr. Lav Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that he has no instruction as file has been taken back by the petitioner. 3. Taking into consideration the submission made by Mr. Lav Sharma, the petition is dismissed.
However, the petitioner would be at liberty to revive his prayer if cause of action survive. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge vatti
Source: High Court of Chhattisgarh. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.