THE Hl.BH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT JfiBftl-.PUR /2000, WRIT PETITION No. XWRIT PETITION UNDER ARTfCLEN226/-227 QF THE CONST I TUTION ON 'IND Ifi) PETITIQNERSj 1. MfiHESH KUMflR ROHELA S/'o Shri Bhagwandas Rohela. aged about 35 years,. R/o Katora Talab; Raipur Bistt»Raipur(MP).. Janakraj 'Jaggi, '. • S/'o Shrj. Hari Kish.an Jaggi ,aged about &5 years, R/o R.K. Befcri,, Statian Road, Raipur (MP). 3. Hasnuk-h Khasgiwala S/o Shri S.F. Khasgiiiala, ,ag&d about 49 years, R/o C-4.1, . <* Bombay. Harket, Raipur Bistt. P.sipur(MP). 4. Burssi.t .Singh Sai.ni S/o Pr.it.a^-S.inah .Sai-ni^ ' -aged about 52 yea.rs, R/o D-21, Boaibay Market, Raipur (HP). 5. Jashpal Singh Bachwani, S/Q Shri Dulichand Ba.chwani aged about 30 years, !/o Bindhi Caap, Tilda, ^istrict, Raipur (HP). 6. Niranjan Singh S/o Dhillan . :; aged about '63 yea.rs, New Cloth-Harket, • ^ : Pandri, RaipureMP) : 7. Hanohar Lal; Soni-fani,, i/o'Dukalharam' Sonwani, aged about.33 years, . R/o Dhaflilari Road, tevpuri,Rai.pur(HF') . //Versus// , : RESPONDENTSi 1. RfiIPUR-DEVELOpnENT AUTHORITY, fl body irico:rpo rated under Section-38 af lagar Tatha Bram Nivesh ! Adhiniyain, having it's . office at:B.E; Road, . ; sur (HP). 2 • The Chairnian 5 Raipur Bev-elopment Aut:hpFity,Raipur(MP. 3. Tahsildar, ' • ' (fteeovery 'OfficeE->:,j . Raipur DeyeloRHient. • : fluthority,Raij3ur(nP:); 'y'f/.i ISiia PETITION UNDER fiRTICLE•226/227 OF_IHE CONSTITUT!OM ON INDIfi' HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHAmSGAKH: BIUUSPUR Single Bench: Hoa'Me Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. W. P. Ko. 2642 of 2000 Petitioners Versus Respondents Mahesh Kuniar Rohela & Others. Raipur Developinent Aufhority, And ofhers. Shri Goutam Bhaduri, counsel for the petitioners. Shri B.P. Shanna, counsel for respondents No. 1 and 2. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Goveroxaent Advocate for the respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (12h May, 2006) I.A. No. 5007/2006, this is an application for withdrawal of the writ petition. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents have no objection, if the application is allowed. In view of fhe avermeuts inade in fhe appUcation, the appUcation is ordered, as prayed for. Consequentiy, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge .^-0 uTP