”a @ HIGH COURT'OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON’BLE SHR! SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Writ Petition N0. 1326 of 2604 1A Siddharth Verma, aged 27 years, son of Suresh Kumar Verma, R/o. Carona Chowk, Gondpara, Biiaspur (C.G.) 2. Santosh Sahu, aged 26 years, son of KR. Sahu, r/o. 9/B/2, Sector 2, Bhi!ai: Distt. Durgs(C.G.) 3. Vinav Jaiswal aged 29 years son of (RC. J’aiswaL r/o. ;Post Godrapara, Chirmirig Korea, PHC - Podi, Dist. Korea C.G.) Harmeet Singh Khaisa, aged 28 years, son of S.B.S. Khalsa, Rio. Behind Caltex Petro! Pump, Bastar Road, Dhamtari (C.G.) 5. Vinod Kumar Singh; aged 28 years, son of Vishram Singh, R/o. Mangai Nagar, Katni,'P.S. Madhav Nagar, PHC — Salka, Distt. Korea (C.G.) 6. Santosh Singh Patel, aged 27 years, son of CB. Patel, r/o. Amapara Road, Baiod (C.G.) Versus RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Department of Public Heaith and Famiiy Weifare and Medica! Education, Mantraiay, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) ?ETITIONERS 2. Pt. RavisHénkar Shukla University; through its Registrar, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Deany Pt. Jawahar Lai Nehru Medicai Coiiege, Raipur (C.G.) /i r r ,7 :‘ mt .. _ ( g 4. The Board of Higher Secondary Education, through its Controuer, Raipur (C.G.) 5. Medical Council of india: Aiwan-E- Gaiib Marg, Kotia Road, New Delhi — 110002 Director, Heaith Services, Government of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawani Raipur (C.G.) 'u Present : Shri Kshitij Sharma? counsei for the petitioners. , _ 4 Writ Petition under Articie 226 and 22? of the Constitution of india Shri NK Agrawal, Deputy Advocate Generai for the $tate I respondents No.1; 3 & 6. Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate on behaif of Shri RS Marhas, counsei for respondent No.5. ORDER (18m August, zoos) The foitowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.Jt : Shri NK Agrawat, iearned Deputy Advocate Generai for the State submitted that the petition filed by the petitioners in the year 2004 challenging the counseling for admission to the PG seats in the year 2004 has now become infructuous. 2) Shri Kshitij Sharma, learned counsel’ for the petitioners submitted that‘on the strength of interim order dated 02.07.2004, the petitioners were given weightage of 5% marks for i a the admission in PG course on account of the services rendered by them in the rurai areas and the dismissal of the writ petition as infructuous may come in their way in continuing their further studies. 3) The interim order passed by this Court on 02.07.2004 was partly modifies by the Apex Court vide order dated 12.07.2006 passed in SLP No (s) 16187 4) parties agreed that the Writ petition may be disposed of in/terms of interim order dated 02.07.2004 as modified by the Apex Court vide order dated 12.07.2006. 5) — 161 90 / 2004. learned counsel for‘the During the course of hearing, The writ petition, therefore, stands disposed of in terms of the interim order dated 02.07.2004 as modified by the Apex Court vide order dated 12E2006. Sd" . l a SunilKumar SinlL Cluef Jusuce ‘ ‘ Judge padma » \ W" w