IN I'EE KIéH C9WRT 9F WDICE§A$ARH¥ AWR:G£ETTI®33ILASPR0 writ petitim m. 1‘g% /2u1 ( PETITI$N VMER ARTICLE 225/227 @F C$N$TIWTI$N W INDIA ) $mt. Ramdul-ari Ihath‘ wuow if late namsingh watt. " Farest Guard " Resident of village: Magardw Tahsil s laloda lazary District: Raipur {amattisgazm gwmxmmn VGtSt‘S gmmwww “ ‘Ihe State cf- Qhhattisgarh through: Se retary .f Ftrest nupartmanta $.KJhawm swretaria£. Raputtamattisxgath} AChief 2. £11e @onservator .f Foresm .KJhawamx Raiyur gmahtisgarh) . The Canservator. Raipure gypk Raipur échhatti s garb) The Bivisional af£i¢en Eorest Dnu Raipurmhhattxsgarh) / EETITI$N WMER. MTxCLE 32 /227 5F WMTIWTIWV @F IMH. w ‘ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI56ARH: BILA5PUR I singte Bench:' Hm'bne 5m Smash K. Agnihom, J. MM Sm‘r. Ramdulari Bhhf'f Pe'ri'fioner Versus The Sfa‘i’e of Chharrisgurh and omers Respondenfs Mr. Vishnu Kashfa', counsel for the pe‘ri'rioner. Ms. Deepali I Pandey, Panel Lawyer Sfafe/respo’ndenfs. for *the ORDER (Passed an ms 26* Day of Febrm, 2007) IA. No. 1356/2007. This is an applicu‘h'on far withdrawal of'fhe writ pe-Hfion. lmrned counsei appearing for The Sfafe/respondenfs has n0 objection. The applioafion is ardered as prayed for. Ccnsequen'l’lir, fhe wrif pe'ri‘f'ion is dismissed as .wii'hdmm. No order as Tc cos-rs. y Sdl— » g Satish K. Agnihotri f, rs, Subhash ‘NV‘