^ ^ -a, H C^ }^i IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR u^^ ^^) ^CGJ^ WRIT PETITION fC^) N0. <<'-/ ' " OF 2011 PETITIONER ^^^c ^.^s^" ^yy ^^>- ^80 ^••••" Dinesh Kumar Manglani, S/o Shri Manohar Lal Manglani, aged about 36 years, R/o Subhash Ward, Kanker (Manjhapara), Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: the Secretary, Town Administration Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Collector, Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 3. Chief Municipal Officer, Municipality Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker (C.G.) 4. Municipality Kanker, Through: President, Municipality Kanker, District North Bastar Kanker(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ H1GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WR1T PETIT10N (C) N0.2533 OF 201 1 PETITjQNER RESPONDENTS Dinesh Kumar IVIangiani Versus State of Chhattlsgarh & Others (Writ petltion under Artlcie 226 of the Constitutionof india) Singie Bench : Hon'bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri P.P. Sahu, -Advocate for the petitlon,er. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Dy. Govt. Advocatefor the State. Sh.ri Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate appears on be'nalf of Shri Kishore Bhaduri, Advocate for theirespondents No.3 & 4. OROER (ORAL) i (Passedonthis 11th dayofMay, 2011) 1. At the very outset, teamed counsel appearing for the respondents No.3 & 4 submits that the issue involved hereln shali be iooked into by the respondents No.3 & 4 and proper action shai! be taken, In accordancewith !aw. 2. in view of foregoing, according tothe learned counsel appearing for the petitioner nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Gowri Sd'- .. .„ Satish K. Agnihotn Judge