•^r ^'. Single 8ench c . ^ . \G° L- ? IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (CIVIU N0. 5 (c? l" OF 2011 PETITIONER: J €^-^ ••'' ^'' ..•" <^^ ^y RESPONDENTS: ^ Smt. Vani Rao, Agedabout 53 years, W/o Shri E. Ramendra Rao, R/o Link Road, Bilaspur (C.G.), Mayor of Municipal Corporation, Bilaspur (C.G.) -VERSUS- ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Urban Administration & Development, Government of Chhattisgarh, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) /I. Commissioner, Urban Administration and Development, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT/WRITS, DIRECTIONS ETC.. IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS, CERTIORARI AND/OR ANY OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ^>V^\dj^ ^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) N0.5646 OF 2011 PETITIONER Smt. Vani Rao Versus RESPONDENTS / State of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Dr. N.K. Shukla, Sr. Advocate with Shri Shailendra Shukla & Ms. Ritu Mishra, Advocates'forthe petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General for the State. ORDER (Passed on this 22nd day of September, 2011) .) 1. At the very outset, Shri Murthy, learned Dy. Advocate General appearing for the State, on instructions, submits that before passing the final order, proper opportunity of hearing shall be afforded to the petitioner. 2. Dr. Shukla, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view of the above-stated submission made by the learned Dy. Advocate General, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication, at this stage and the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition. 3. Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Gowri Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge