HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH APPELLANT PETITIONER RESPONDENTS 1 Municipal CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HGN’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, J. Writ Appeal No. 274 of 2008 M/s B.S. Bhatia & Company Petrol Pump Partnership Firm, through its partner Hardeep Singh Bhatia, S/o Late B.S. Bhatia, aged about 51 years, Old Bus Stand, Raipur (ce) 'Versus Corporation, Raipur, through its Commissioner, Malviya Road, Raipur (C.G.) ‘ 2 State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Locai Self Government, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur (C.G.) 3 Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Regional Office Medina Building, above Vijaya Bank, Kutchary Chowk, Raipur (C.G.) 4 Collector, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT APPEAL UNDER SECTION 2 CLAUSE t1) OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT (APPEAL TO DIVISION BENCH) ACT, 2006 Present: ._ Shri Manindra Shrivastava, learned Senior Counsel with Shri Varun Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel with Ms. Rinki Tamrakar, learned counsel for respondent No.1. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, learned Government Advocate for the State/respondents No. 2 & 4. Shri Vinod Deshmukh, learned counsel for respondent No.3. Shri Bhishma Kinger, learned counsel for the proposed intervener. ORDER (18m March, 2009) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Appeilant M/s B’;S. Bhatia & Company has filed this writ appeal against the order dated 08-12-2008, passed in W.P. No.3185/2006 whereby learned Single Judge dismissed the appellant’s writ petition in the following terms : “For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, this petition is dismissed as not maintainable. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner and other parties to seek redressal of the grievances in civil suit No.22-A/99, which is pending consideration before the Court of Second Additional District Judge, Raipurl Learned Court below shall consider and decide the matter, in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made, if any, hereinabove.” 2. Shri Manindra Shrivastava, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the writ appeal with the liberty of filing a separate Civil Suit for the redressal of the a‘ppellant's/ petitioner’s grievances projected in the writ petition and for the protection of the appellant’s/ petitioner's rights in the matter. 3. Permission granted. hlmml l A‘x' 4. With the above liberty, the writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. ,eVsdl- i Sd7— chief Justice Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Judge