SAVITRI SHARMA vs VARISTH KARMIK ADHIKARI Advocate - R.S.PATEL — WPL/71/2019
Disposed: Contested--DISSMISS FOR DEFAULT/NON-PROSECUTION on 15th April 2026.
CNR: CGHC010085082019
Filing Number
WPL/4887/2019
Filing Date
06-Mar-2019
Registration No
WPL/71/2019
Registration Date
08-Mar-2019
Judge
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Coram
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
LABOUR MATTERS ( 1 )
Sub-Category
OTHERS AND MIXED BAG ONES. ( 112 )
Judicial Branch
Writ Section
Decision Date
15-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISSMISS FOR DEFAULT/NON-PROSECUTION
Last updated 22-May-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.SAVITRI SHARMA
Adv. MALAY KUMAR BHADURI,SAREENA KHAN,SAREENA KHAN, ,Sareena Khan
-
2.Smt. Laxmi Sharma
-
3.Smt. Asha
-
4.Smt. Durga
-
5.Ajay Sharma
Respondent(s)
-
1.VARISTH KARMIK ADHIKARI Advocate - R.S.PATEL
-
2.Varisth Anubhag Abhiyanta,
-
3.Mandal Seket Dursanchar Abhiyanta,
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
15-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan PandeyView PDF
The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the writ petition (WPL No. 71 of 2019) filed by Savitri Sharma and four others against railway officials, dismissing it for want of prosecution due to the petitioners' failure to appear for hearing even in the second round. The court found no option but to dismiss the case in the absence of representation from the petitioners' side. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
16-Jun-2019
Fresh Matters ( Dormant Case )
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
-
16-Jun-2019
Fresh Matters ( Dormant Case )
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy
-
18-Mar-2019
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam KoshyView PDF
-
13-Mar-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Mar-2019
Case filed
Registration No. WPL/71/2019
The Chhattisgarh High Court dismissed the writ petition (WPL No. 71 of 2019) filed by Savitri Sharma and four others against railway officials, dismissing it for want of prosecution due to the petitioners' failure to appear for hearing even in the second round. The court found no option but to dismiss the case in the absence of representation from the petitioners' side. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts