@ IN THE HIG‘I COUm? OF JUDICATURE AT JABALPUR (MP). . Wrl’s Petltion 1‘30. 3 (93 /1998 Writ Pat-Mich undar Article 226 of the Coast itu‘hion ef Indi a. Petitionexw t u &— ¢ N/s Tiurg Roadways Private Limited,° } Th wough Managing 3irector Nirnal fangh Del Pechrfaara, 311% (MP) ;r/“ Durg fursyort bau‘aany Priv¢£e Li“i$eé, through M'meging Directoxu Prakehn Ueahlehn$éarsh Pagan ‘Durg WP). L‘ > »‘ x t»‘ Swaroop Ghana“. Jail son of Ghisulal Jain, agéd ¢bout 48 yea: sE W Farmer of. W5 Faye; lrcvellm rezsidem of 3adzar Eazam imam (W). Ealindre Nichra, an ofBhairnv Prmg‘di 1Vishra,aged abmm 50 year“? x *aha aae Travwlc‘ Lew but stand Burg; (MP). Versus The ‘unicipal Carpergdsicn, through the C39mmik‘:s;oner, Burg (MP). 3&5p ancient : : Particulars of the Petitimnsrs 145.; given in the cause title. Particulam of 'the Respondentx ,s ’given in the causa iaitle. A ttc2' x HEGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1365 OF 1998 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon’ble Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :- None for the petitioners. Ms. Sharmila Singhai, Advocate for the respondent. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 10‘“ day of December, 201 0) 1. The matter is called for hearing. None appears nor is any representation made on behaif of the petitioners. The petitioners may not be interested in pursuing the matter. 2. in View of the above, the petition is dismissed for want of prosecution. 3. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the petitioners forthwith. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihou'i Judge ashok Petitioners M/s. Durg Roadways Private Limited & Others Versus Respondenl The Municipal Corporation; Durg.