T Wa^s 4'ymftK ItdlJ^K Izalt 61 fite 6(tfite jsh - 1'bbito ('lt'^l) l3JI»bll^N> - Ij^j '^fei^te iKiy ia^ (z) ('Jf^) >Pbl-!> hl^lkk (l^k •i^r^-^ 'ltlfc^ i^J^ J^^ '^^- - lli-& 'fcfilfe akft^e (i) h^tbbblbto- &^^1 ('lt'^l) MtSiUdl-ll^ 'Wia^iS --^ 'i^i(fcs|<jo i^ii^ ^biK i^^m^ '^lSjy ifebiaft 'lizh^Ji kl>li^& ^ Jdi^te fpSQ. 6fr S»£'lbbj^4 >lk<£ Ifc^ : :7^/i;L? ^ (^M^ looz/ : tfeut<6 'h'^ ^Ebt^ '&^. j23lt i|tfc«a^|£tbyMlfcK b^ft b^.Mk JSItft (fe&^lte ~~ HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURB CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR Sin^e Bench: Hon'Me Shri Satish K. AgnUiotri. J. W.P.8. No. 4137 of 2008 Petitioner Respondents Naresh Kuiaar Mahobia Versus State of Madhya Pradesh & Ofhers Shri Rakesh Anfhony, coiiasel for fhe petitioner. Shri Arviad Dubey, Paiiel lawyer for fhe State/respondents. ORAL ORDBR (12th July, 2006) 1. I.A. No. 6640/2006, this is aa appUcation for wifhdrawal of the writ petition. 2. Learaed coiuisel for the petitioner, submite fhat durii^g fhe peudency of fhis petition, fhe relief sought for ia. fhis petition has been granted by fh.e State/respondents aad as such, fhis petition has become infiructuous. Learaed counsel appeariug for the State/respondents does not dispute fhe fact The applicatk>n is ordercd, as prayed for. 2. Consequently, the petition is disxxiissed as withdrawxi. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge G.o'-'^