HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM : HON’BLE MR. S.R.NAYAK, C.J. AND HON’BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRL J. RIT PETITION NO.590 OF 2001 Petitioner -. Vishnu Prasad Goyai, Aged ab%ut"49 Yearg, SIG Late Ram Krishna Das GoyaL Secretary, District Chemist and Druggist Association, Raigarh, Resident of Raigarh. Tehsil — Raigarh, District - Raigarh (C.G.) VerSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Resgondents . w vel'SLIS Resgondents : 1 . State of Chhattisgarh, Through . Secretary, Public Health & Family Secretary, Public Hea!th & Family Welfare Deptt. And Medicai Education Deptt. Oid D.K.Hospitai, Raipur (C.G.) ‘ 2. Dr. K.L. Gopawar, Registrar-Cum- £1 Secretary, Registration Tribunal, ‘1 Ayurvedic Hospital, First Floor a Noorani Chowk, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chhattisgarh Pharmacy Council, Thtough : Registrar, Ayutvedic Hospital, First Floor, Noorani Chowk, ‘ Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION No.1503 OF 2001 Petitioner : Ashok ku. Agrawal, aged— 42 yrs, S/o- Late Satyanarayan Agrawal, Occupation— Druggist & Vice- President, Distt: Janjgir, Champa Chemist & Druggist Association, R/o- Sakti, Distt: Janigir, Champa, (C.G.) Weifare Deptt and Medical Education Deppt. ,Old D.K. HospitaL Raipur (C.G.) 2. Dr. K.L. Gopawar. Registrar-cum— Secretary, Registration Tribunai Ayurvedic Hospitai, First Fioor Noorani Chowk, Raja Taiab Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chhattisgarh Pharmacy Cauncit, Through : Registrar, Ayurvedic Hospital, First Fioor, Noorani Chowk, Raja Talab Raipur (C.G.) 3?: i,,') Present : Mr. Uttam Pandey, counsel for the petitioners in both the petitions. Mr. Prashant Mishra, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Utkarsh Verma, Deputy Government Advocate for respondent No.1lState in both the petitions. ORAL ORDER (Passed onWW 14 of September, 2006) The following order of the Court was passed by S.R.Nayak, C.J. : Writ Petitions No.590 of 2001 and 1503 of 2001 involve similar facts and a common question of law. therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. ln our considered opinion. both the writ petitions have become infructuous. lt needs to be noticed that in these writ petitions. the petitioners have challenged the validity of the constitution of Registration Tribunal. Learned Additional Advocate General. who appears for the first respondent, on instruction, would submit that subsequent to tiling of these writ petitions, Pharmacy Council has been constituted. ln view of this development, reviewing the validity of the constitution of‘the Registration // @ Tribunai under the notification dated 1-3-2001 (Annexure P-1) would not survive for decision-making. The writ petitions are, therefore, dismissed as infructuous. No costs. 3. A copy of this order be piaced in the record of the connected kx Gopai “My f Wm petition. wMViWW“‘RV /\ Sdi- . r Agmho ' tn r r Chs'dfl-Justice Ie sarish K-