DR. YASER QURESHI vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G. — MCC/294/2026
Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 25th March 2026.
CNR: CGHC010112602026
Filing Number
MCC/6471/2026
Filing Date
17-Mar-2026
Registration No
MCC/294/2026
Registration Date
23-Mar-2026
Judge
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Coram
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
Bench Type
Division Bench
Category
ORDINARY CIVIL MATTERS ( 17 )
Sub-Category
MATTERS RELATING TO RESTORATION ( 1732 )
Judicial Branch
Civil Section
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 15-Apr-2026
Petitioner(s)
-
1.DR. YASER QURESHI
Adv. SYED MOHAMMAD SOHAIL AFZAL,SYED MOHAMMAD SARTAJ AFZAL,SYED MOHAMMAD SARTAJ AFZAL, ,SYED MOHAMMAD SARTAJ AFZAL
-
2.Dr. Dharmender Singh
Respondent(s)
-
1.STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Advocate - A.G.
-
2.Commissioner
-
3.Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission (CGPSC)
Adv. DR. SUDEEP AGRAWAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar AgrawalView PDF
The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the miscellaneous application filed by Dr. Yaser Qureshi and Dr. Dharmender Singh to restore Writ Petition No. 1763/2026, which had been dismissed for want of prosecution on 13.03.2026. The Court accepted the applicants' explanation that their counsel's inadvertent absence caused the dismissal and found sufficient grounds to restore the case to its original number for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Fresh Matters
Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal
-
17-Mar-2026
Case filed
Registration No. MCC/294/2026
The High Court of Chhattisgarh allowed the miscellaneous application filed by Dr. Yaser Qureshi and Dr. Dharmender Singh to restore Writ Petition No. 1763/2026, which had been dismissed for want of prosecution on 13.03.2026. The Court accepted the applicants' explanation that their counsel's inadvertent absence caused the dismissal and found sufficient grounds to restore the case to its original number for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts