SWGLE BENLé§ Cg wfk m&mmmmm.rm w.P. (S)No. mm /2009 s.B. 1’ swmqa‘h f§maéi HF? w. WHTH Em, 3H WWW 7o mf, @Enfirq—ca Ef>am 31W tnfwm firm? gif, fimmiT Gram—WRIT Erm‘ a 6 EITHTE, HE. mm? urf%WT$?n‘ f‘xrraT ‘cyf (EFL) WQ’ Ewf‘r‘ana WWI gm — SIfEfWa €f%IEr, wm‘vu WWW fmTTTr, WIT-11 QfiH, €31? firx’TEE‘xIUT HfirfE', wag? (an) 2. EaTaEli HTWW WWW QH' fmam 1am. 151m? Hug-x! (8.11) GU ‘a‘awm @‘WD Hm‘Ta WWW QH‘ @WW Em. mug? 4. sang—cm, HEW WWH f§FTH gn‘ (EFL) Hfia, HWW WIRE QEr' WWH Gca—m—é‘mw fmTTTr 1m. gnaw 1mm? / 1% arfmst afan‘H aaw‘q' '226 WWW: H'fwFr mfiam aim‘ firmTiW? Hm? fEIaEH mm @— @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.4142 OF 2009 (Writ Petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- None for the petitioner. Shri A.V. Sridhar, Panel Lawyer for the State. Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, Dy. Adv. General for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 29*“ day ofAprii, 201 1) The matter is called for hearing twice. On both occasions, none appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner may not be interested in the matter. 2) ln View of the above, the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sd/- V Satish K. Agnihotri'i Judge ' l. PETITIONER Amiruddin Siddiqui Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh &