/ singla Bench C/a£ lazy/x C49 lN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIéN (C) NO. '5 0%6 OF 2011 (3.8.) PETIT!ONEE: /' Munendra Kumar PateL 8/0 Gopinath Aghariya, aged about 41 years, Sarpanch — Gram Panchayat, Biiari (J), Village Bilari (J), Janpad Panchayat, Kasdol; Biock/Tahsil Kasdol, Sub—Division BHaigarh, DistrictRaipur(C.G.) — Nmxkgvy‘i‘if‘w RESPONDENTS: / 1. g“ ‘M‘V £1;- J‘ ‘ VERSUS Girish Kumar, S/o Radheshyam Karsh, aged about 35 years, R/o Village Bilarl, Gram Panchayat, bilari) Block Kasdol, DistrictRaipur(C.G.) ~ MVV‘CQKX. Keshav Prasad Patel, S/o Kapoorchand ‘Aghariya, aged about not kwnon Hemlal Patel; S/o Sadanand, aged about mot knwon, Bodhram Sahu, S/o Shlvprasad Sahu, aged about not known, Respondent No. 2 to 4 are Resident 0f Village Bilari, Gram Panchayat Bilari,, Block Kasdol, District Raipur (C.G.) Presiding Officer, Polling Booth Not 152 (Gram Panchayat Bilari) through: Shri Jageshwar Prasad, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Primary Middle School, Saliha, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Raipur (C-G-l Presiding Officer, Polling Booth No. 153 (Gram Panchayat Bilari) through: Shrl Lakheshwar Prasad Khatkar, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Primary ’b @ Middle School, Saliha, Tahsil Bilaigarh, District Raipur (C.G.) 7. Sub-Divisional Officer, Bilaigarh, District Raipur (C.G.)> WRIT PETlTlON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION AND/OR A SUITABLE DIRECTION OR ORDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER u WGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (C) NO. 5086 OF 2G“ (Writ Petition under Artide 226 of the Constitution of lndia) Sinaie Bench : Hcn’mé Shri Sai§sh K. Agnihotri, J. Present :— Shri Jitendra Paii with Shri Sourabh Upadhyay, Advocates for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S.Mur€hy, Dy. Advocate General for the State. Shri Mano} Paranjpe, Advocaie for the Caveator. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 02“” day of September. 201 1) g 1. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that after fiiing of this petitten! subsequent development has taken piace. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with iiberty to iiie fresh anci better petition. Learned counsel aoaearino for other side have no objection. it is ordered as oraved for. Accordingiv. the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the above-stated iibertv. it so advised. ...... .. ashok PETlTiONER Munendra Kumar Patei Versus RESPONDENTS Girish Kumar & Others