7 WKE Emmi N THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAR AT BILASPUR PETITION (S) No. . z u Vka , g _ ar/ 4’ hir Gvt. at ’ o , ay g hB— ,I *B h C.) of 201 0 . is Chandra Kar Ae 51 ye I a S/o Late Sr'N;N.Ka i Head: Ma“ OCcupa’ton— ster ’Primx Schol’ ‘choterDhabha’lock asana, ‘District—Ma‘a-samund (..G VERSUS tate of Chhattisgar Throuh the Principl Secretary School Education Deartment, D.K; Bhawan? Mantralaa, Raipur (.G.) Te nd SCy h Uer eretar _ chool Education Department, D.K._ hawan, Mantralay-a, \Raipur: (C.G. ’ESPONENT RDS S S. B ) e istrict'duc‘ation Offie chool Educationnepartme stri G.) h Block ducat Officer / cool dation epar't‘rne Drict ( G )1 W , 6 O E A Th DE cr , \S Dnt; Dict- MahaSamund‘.(C. ' Te Eion , Sh Euc Dwnt, ' ist Mahasamund C RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22 F TH V CONSTITUTION OF INDI @' x, I H r WRIT . [S h g a p S. ‘ y C HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 5144 of2010 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF WDIA SB: Hon’ble Shl‘i Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri J.N.Nande, Advocate for the-petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 11 day ofAugust, 201 I) 1. Learned coumel appearing for the petitioner submits that the gievance raised in ihe insiant petition has already been redressed. Thus, nothing survives for adjudication. 2. Learned counsel appearing for other side does not controvert the above submission. In View ofthe' above, the writ petition is dismissed as having become immuous. Sd/- . {Satish K- Agnihom' f Judge ? i PETITIONER Vikas Chandra Kar. VERSUS RESPONDENTS State ofChhanisgarh & Others.