Chhattisgarh High Court
WPC/4622/2021 of MINOR JAI MISHRA Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH on 14 October 2026
2026:CGHC:44619
2026:CGHC:44619 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPC No. 4622 of 2021 1 - Minor Jai Mishra S/o Mukesh Kumar Mishra, Aged About 16 Years Through Father And Legal Guardian Mukesh Kuamar Mishra,all R/o Village Bandha Bazar Kotra Tahsil Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
CGHC010290912021
2026:CGHC:44619
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
WPC No. 4622 of 2021
1 - Minor Jai Mishra S/o Mukesh Kumar Mishra, Aged About 16 Years Through Father And Legal Guardian Mukesh Kuamar Mishra,all R/o Village Bandha Bazar Kotra Tahsil Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
2 - Minor Anurag Mishra S/o Mukesh Kumar Mishra Aged About 14 Years Through Father And Legal Guardian Mukesh Kuamar Mishra. R/o Village Bandha Bazar Kotra Tahsil Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon (C.G.).
3 - Nitesh Kumar Mishra, S/o Naresh Kumar Mishra, Aged About 30 Years R/o Village Bandha Bazar Kotra Tahsil Ambagarh Chowki District Rajnandgaon (C.G.)
... Petitioners
Versus
1 - State of Chhattisgarh Secretary Department Of Forest, Mahanadi Bhavan Atal Nagar Raipur (C.G.).
2 - Divisional Forest Officer, Rajnandgaon Forest Division Rajnandgaon
(C.G.)
3 - Chief Conservator of Forest Regional, Durg Circle Durg (C.G.).
4 - Additional Principal Chief Conservator Of Rorest, North Block Aranya Bhawan, 2nd Floor, Atal Nagar Raipur. (C.G.).
5 - State Leave Committee, Through Chairman Principal Chief Conservator
Page 1 of 2
Of Forest, North Block Aranya Bhawn 2nd Floor Atal Nagar Raipur Chhattisgarh
... Respondents
(Cause title is downloaded from CIS Periphery.)
For Petitioners
:
Mr. Vipin Punjabi, Advocate.
For State
:
Mr. Anand Dadariya, Dy. A.G.
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order on Board 15.10.2026
1. . At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners had obtained a No Objection Certificate from the office of their erstwhile counsel in the year 2021 itself.
2. . Despite the matter being called twice, none appears on behalf of the petitioners to prosecute the present petition.
3. In view of the absence of any representation on behalf of the petitioners, despite their having obtained a No Objection Certificate from their erstwhile counsel in the year 2021, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the writ petition for want of prosecution.
4. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/-
(Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge U.K. Raju
Page 2 of 2
Loading citations and judicial treatment…