Petitioners Respondents 1) Vishwanath Yadav, S./o. Shri Ram Bharos, aged about 24 years, R/o. Gram Panoha'/at Khamariya, Janpad Panciiayat- Munteli, District Bilaspur (CG). 2) Dinesh Kashyap, S/o. Shri Ram Dayai Kashyap, aged about 32 years, R/o. Gram Panchayat Semarkona, Janpad Panchayat Mungeli, District Biiaspur (CG). 3) Govind Sing'n, S/o. Shri Santosh Singh, agedabout 26 years, R/o. Gram Panchayai Ohapal, Janpad Panchayat Munteii, District iilaspur (CG). 4) Ramsh Kumar Mersa, S./o.Shri Durgaprasad, aged about 26 years, R/o. Gram Panchayat Semsra'iuva, Janpad Panchayat Munaeli, Disfrict Bilaspur (CG)< 5) Kartikram, S/o. Shri Juthelram, aged about 21 yeare, R/o. Gram Panohayat Singhbandhe, Janpaet Ranchayat Mungeli, District Bilaspur (CQ). . Versus 15 The State of Chhatfisgarti, through the Seoretary Deoartment of Panchayat . and Rural Deveiopment, DKS Bha'iivan, Raipur (CG) 2) The Commissioner, Chhattisgarh Emptoyment Guarantee Councii Vi.kas Aayukt, Karyalay Vikas Bhawan, Civi! Line, Raipur (CG) 3) Union of india, through the Secretary, Ministry of Rura.' Deyeiopment; New Del.hi 4) Distriof Program Co-ordinaSor (Cotiecto.r), under the National Rural Empioyment Guarantee Aot 2005, Bitespur, District Biiaspur (CG}. 5) Janpad Panchayat, Mungeli, Chief Executive Officer, District Bilaspjr (CG). 6) Zila Panchayat, Bilaspur, through the Chief Executive Offioer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur 2-— y-^rfi Petition under Article 226 of the Con^itution OT indla) •. Satlsh %. Agnihotri, J. Shri F.S. are, counsel for the petitioners. Shri A.S. Kachhawaha, counselfor theStafe. Shri S.K. Beriwal, Standlng Counsel for Union of India/respondent No.3. ShriSumesh Bajaj, counsel forthe respond&^ts No. 5 and6. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 5 and 6 submits that the petitioners have been re-appointed as Gram Rqjgar Sahayaks on oontract basis. Thus, tl-iis petition has become mfructuous. 2) Shri F.S. Khare, learned counse! appearing for the petrtioners does not controvert the sutimission made by learned counsel for the responcients No. 5 & 6. He submits that nothing sun/ives in this matter. 3) Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as having beoome infructuous- Consequertly, i.A.No.1 stands disposed of. ,—-— Sd/- I SatishK.Agnihotri Judge