HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONERS Writ Petition (S) No. 7396 of2007 1. RamNath Dliniw, S/o Ram Singh Dliniw, Aged 32 years, occupation Service, Posted as Technical Assistant under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme at Janpad Panchayat Balrampur, Tahsil Pai, RamEinujganj R/o Village Lamkena, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Cliliattisgarh. 2. Ashok Kumar Raj, S/o Mohan Singu Raj, aged 34 years, occupation Service, Posted as Tecliiucal Assistant under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Seheme at Janpad Panchayat Rajp"-r, Talisil Rajpur, Rfo village Charpara, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Mahendra Kumar Sandilya, S/o Dhann Shaya Sandilya, Aged 30 years, occupation Service Posted as Techmcal A_sgistaat under the Nafional Riiral Employ-iient Guarantee Scheme at Janpad Panchayat Rajpur, Tahsil Rajpur R/o Village Nauki, Talisil Rajpur, District Surguja, Chhattisgarh. B-E.SPONDENT8 : 1. State ofCfahattisgarh, Through the Seeretary, Department of Panchayat & Rural Development, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Chhattisgarh State Emplo^'ment unplementation Guarantee Council, Througli its Presideiit, ChiefMinsiter's Secretariat , DKS Bhawan, Raipur Chhattisgarh. 3. Union of India, Tlirough the Seeretary, Miiiistry of Rura! Development New Deuii. 4. District Progranime Coordinator (Co!!ector) under the National Rurai Empioyment Guarantee Aet, 2005 Surgiga, District Surgiya, Chhattisgarh. 5. Zila Panchayai, Surgtija, Through its Chief Executive Qfficer, Surguja, District Surgiija, Clihattiggarh. iTVKTT PETTHON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTmmON OF INDIA) fSB: Hon'Me Mr. Sa<isii K. Aaiuliotri. J.) Present : Stoi Rajeev Slirivastava, Advoeate for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Deputy Advocate General for the State/respondent Shri S.K. Beriwal, Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 3. Shri Sumegh Bajaj, Advocate forthe respondent No; 5. ORALORDER (Passed on tWs 25al ofMai-ch, 2008) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the regpondeiit No. 5 has filed an afEdavit dated 17.03.2008 stating that no grievance ofthe petitioners remains for adjudicatioa as a!l t!ie oetitioners have been considered for re-aooointmeat. 2. Petitiouer No. 1 and 2 have been re-appointed as Gram P-ozgar Sahayaks on contract basis. With regard to petitioner No. 3, it is submitted that his application i^i K I) ( ^:- il®® Ss^va Sahu was received on 27.11.2007 i.e. afler cut-off date, thus, the same was not eonsidered for re-appoiiitnient. 3. !n vlew ofthe elear and categorical ststentcnt msde in the af^idavit, accordiilg to lc'^nied eoiinsel anpe;ar[ns fbr fhe resnondent No. 5. nothiiig sur^ives ui this matter. 4. Sliri P-.ajeev Slmvastava, 'eamed counsel appearing for the petifioners subnrits tliat fhe petitioners have not verified the facts but siiice the above statement has been made on swom afFidavit, there is no reason to doubt. Tlius, the petition has become inihictiious. 5. Consequenfly, writ petition is disniissed ashaving become "ifhictiious. No order asto costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge S]