\[ ^--^) 5^0 o IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. fS) N0, .^?-^ /2009 PETITIONERS ^" ^w' ^' ^~- .? RESPONDENTS 1] ' Durgesh Mishra S/o. R.N. Mishra, Aged about 31 years, R/o. Deepak Dairy, Nehm Nagar, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) 2] Krishna Pratap Singh, S/o. Sanman Singh, Aged about Vfyears, R/o. HD 08, Sector 2, Pt. Deen Dayal Upadhyay Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (CG) 3] Ku. Anjana Kushwaha, D/o. Bhagwat Prasad Kushwaha, Aged ^ about ^.8 years, R/o. Godpara, Arya Samaj Mandir, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (CG) 4] Anand Kumar Borkar, S/o. Govind Borkar, Aged about fil "years, R/o. Nayapara, Kirtinagar, Sirgitti, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur ((CG)) 5] " Ku. Shipra Jha, D/o. Late Shri Yatindra Kumar Jha, Aged about 34 years, R/o. Sonpur Road, Narayanpur, District Narayanpur (CG) VERSUS 1] State of Chhattisgarh through: Secretary, Home Department (Public Prosecution Directorate), D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur (CG) 2] Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, through: Secretary, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Raipur District Raipur (CG) 3] Exam Controller, Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission, Raipur (CG) ^ / ^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA S. ^'Sf . ~i li^'^1 /K ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATT'ISGARH : BILASPUR • Wi-itPetition,(SLNo, 4703 of 2009 Petitioners ' Durgesh Mishra & otliers Versus Respondents State of Clihattisgarh & others (Writ Petitiou uuder Ardcle 226 offhe Constitution oflndiaj (SB: HojiT3le Shri Satish K. AgTiihotn J.) Shri Maiioj Pai-aujpe, Advocate for fhe petitioners. Shri Yashwaiit Sin.gh Thakur, Depufc- Advocate General for respoudent No. 1. Shri. D. L. Dewaiigan, Advocate for ttie respondents No. 2 & 3. 2. ( Passed on this 29th day ofJanumy, 2010) Heard. Leamed counsel appeanug for the petitioners subinits fhat by way of tfais \\rrit petition fhe petitioners have sought a direction to fix the date for raterview. The date for interview has alreadv been fixed by fhe respondents from 4th to 12t11 Mai-ch,2010. Thus, nothrag siuvives in fhis petition for adjudication, Leamed coiuisel appearuig for the respondents have no objectioii. In view of fhe foregoiug, the writ petition is disniissed as haviag beconie infructuous. No order as to costs. Thakui- Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge