N' c ^niy^^ w^'??^^ - A 1[Q° BEFORE THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (Cl NO.~;fB ^<C /2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS .""^..^ ^o c^/ ^^...•^'l/ ^T-' ^9"' Smt. Pholu Bai Parekh, Aged About83years, W/o. Shri Meghraj Parekh, R/o. Station Road, Sunderganj Ward, Makai Chowk, Dhamatari, Chhattisgarh VERSUS 1) State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Urban Administration & Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2) Municipal Council, Dhamtari, Through Chief Municipal Officer, Dist.-Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh 3) Chief Municipal Officer, Municipal Council, Dist.- Dhamtari, Chhattisgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^\^^- ... ^s^" ^wr ...<\^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0.7396 OF 2011 PETITIONER Smt. Pholu Bai Parekh RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Ashish Surana, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for theState. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Advocates for the respondents No.2 & 3. ORDER (Passed on this 7th day of December, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the very outset, Shri Thakur, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No.2 & 3, fairly submits that fresh notice shall be issued granting reasonabie opportunity of hearing to the petitioner to put forward her case and thereafter final order shall be passed, in accordance with law and on its own merits. Learned counsel further submits that in the meantime, the impugned notice shall not be given effect to. 3. In view of the above, according to the learned counsel for fhe petitjoner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Gowri Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge