@ ^rf^ ^' HiGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Coram. : HON-'BLE SHRi RAJEEVGUPTA, CJ. & HON'BLE SUNSL KUIVIAR SSNHA, J. 1. Harshit Mishra, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri Kailash Mishra, residsnt of Parsada Bada, Sunder Nagar, Ralpur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Nltln Sharma, aged about 25 years, S/o Shn Raghuveer Prasad Sharma, resident of 117, 0-Block; 725, Geeta Nagar, Kanpur (Uttar Pradesh) 3. Girish Agrawa!, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri Ramesh Kumar Agrawai; Ashok Oil industries, Basna, Distnct Mahasamund, (Chhattisgarh) 4. Prashant Kedia, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri Laxman Kedia, resident of Mahant Para, Shlvrinaraln, District Janjgir- Champa, (Chhattisgarh) 5. Manish Raj Kuishreshta, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri Rlshlraj Kulshreshta, resident of 29, Sarta Bagh, Dayal Bagh, Agra (Uttar Pradesh) 6. Sunil Jain, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri M.L. Jain, resldent of Gurunanak Market, Main Road, Dallj Rajahara, District Durg (Chhattisgarh) 7. Shashi Kapoor Singh Parihar, aged about 25 years, S/o Shri A.S. Parihar, resident of Kabir Para, Maruti Ward, Kawardha, Djstrict Kawardha (Chhattisgarh) 8. Pushpendra Nayak, aged about ^-^ 25 years, S/o Shri R.K. Nayak, r i!,^} resident of 477, Near Footbajl House, Sunder Nagar. Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh through the Secretary, Department of Medlcal Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattlsgarh) 2. 3. Director, Medicai Ralpur (Chhattlsgarh) Educatlon. Medicai CoundJ of india, through its Sscretary, Aiwan-E-Galib Marg, Kotia Road, Opposite Mata Sundari Coilege (For Women), NewDelhi:110002 'Writ Petitlon UnderArtlcle 226/2.27 oftheConstitutlon oflndja PreseRt: Shri V.R. Tlwari, counse! forthe petitioners. Shri N.K. Agrawa!, Deputy Advocate Generai forthe State/respondents no. 1 & 2. Shri Dhiraj VV'ankhede, counsei on behaifofShri R.S. Marhas, counssi for respondent No.3. OR D E R (18th August, 2008) The foiiowlng order of the Court was passed by , CJ.: Shri N.K. Agrawal, learned Deputy Advocate Generai submits that the wrlt petition flied by the petitioners in the year 2004 reiating to the P.G. Admissions, has now become infructuous. 2. The writ petition, therefore, is dlsmissed as infructuous. Sd/- Chief Justice padma Sd/- SunilKumarSinha Judge