.^"s'^ J.,^ff;~. l'./""""'» TLJJ )^s^/ ^.^ lllp l^^^i^l^S^- ";«fcs.,y. k / HIGH COLTRT OE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETmONERS WRTI' PETITlONNo, 2842^12002 : 1. Indrapal Singh S/o Kudraj Singh, aged about 42 vears. 2. Harmangal Singh S/o Shivraj Sinsli, aged about 55 vears. 3. Sakter S/o Indrapal Singli, aged about 42 years. 4. Smt.Mamiiati w/o Aiisad Singh, aeed aboi.rt 45 vears.. 5. Ful Kunwar d/'o Udraj Singh, aged about 45 years. 6. Lakhpati Smgii s/o HiraSal, aged about 52 yeai's. 7. Amar Say s'o Shivbhanjan, aged about 60 veare. 8. Ranmath S/o Tangu- aged about 42 years. 9. Dasraativa w/o Badku Ram. aeed about 65 vears. lO.Shobhnath-S/'o Buddhu Singh, aged bo'-it 43 vears. 11. Sawal Singh S/o Buddhu Singh, aged about 45 years. 12.Manohar Singh S/o Buddhu Singh, aged about 50 vears. 13.Kaushalva Baid'b Dallu, aged about 50 vears. 14.Puran Singh S/o Jaglal, aged about 46 years. 15.Udit Narayaa Pandey s/o Ram Ratan Pandey, aged about 45 years. 16.Dalpratap s/o Jaimangal Singh, aged about 55 years. 17.Prem Singh s/o Harinam Singh, aged about 45 years. IS.Ram Pravesh s/'o Harinam Singh, aged about !""*'*%i l''Ci!;iBi .,(:"•'•?'").:, .!'"-;!', '"%,. ~t ^"•iiiSS., i' .riil?b' .;.'.''?fei'rf" •zaSfiB-" gaW" E3S» ' •-t^ 42 vears. 19.Ramesh Kumar Pandey s/b Kailash Prasad Pandey, aged about 42 years. 20.C.handa Bai w/o Mukhdeo Singh, aged about 45 vears. AJ1 r/'o village Banjaridand, P.S. Khadgawan, Tehsil Manendrasarh, Distriet Koria C.G. VERSUS : 1. The State of Chhattisg.arh, throush Secretan'-, Forest, Raipw, C.O. 2. Divisional Forest Officer, Forest Division Koria, Bailamthpur, Distt. Koria C.G. 3. Forest Range Ofiieer, Forest Range Chinmri, Distt. Koria C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227_OF THE CQiNSTITUnON OF INDIA Presezit: Slm A.K.Prasad, Advoeate forthe petitioners. Sliri Shashaiik Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. I! rp"c's<d^-<-! inth-j.3-i-,^f Ai-im-sct ••")nnQX ^fasssQ on iu' os-y 01 AUgU&i^ ZUU>'^.' 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that in view of the aveiments made in para 3 of Ihe retuiTi ffted by the respondents that "whenever anv action of reaioval of encroacliment is uader takeii the same will be always be in accordarice v>'ith'the procedure }aid down by !aw", no'thing survives in this petition for adjudicatioii. 2. Leamed eounsel appearing for the State/respondents agreeing with the aforesaid avennents, has no objection. 3. Conseqiiently, the writ petition is disposed of. M(W)P No. 1843 of 2002, is also disposed of. --———--