“07/ 1W 1ww‘3/é/ LVN?“ ‘mw “ ¥ IN THE HONBLE Hieu coum OF JUDICATURE AT gmspua (ca) manyman ( s )No. 42% OF 2911 PEWONER / 5m? Umm‘ Hasim Win Shri Shmwan Knmur 5mg}: aged about 56 ‘Iws Occupntxon — Service Pusfgds L H V at Commm Hzaifh Center Kusma Tahsd—Kushm: DtsfT sargu3a ( 3.5.} RESPONDENT5 / 1. state a‘f Chhafrisgarh ‘l'hrough the Secre‘rary Deparfmem’ of Madical and Hankh Mammiaya BK. 5'. Bniiding Raipur ( C.E.)‘ The Conecto‘ Ambskapur, Disn— 50r9t‘3n ‘( C5.) The Chief Mimi and Henifh Officer, Mbikapur , Distt— Sargujn (C. 6.) 4. mock Aiedica! Officer, Kusmi Vikash Khmd Kusam mstt: Swgu§a£CEJ WRIT PETI’EONum ARTICLE5'226 OFTHE CONSmTiON OF- _ _ 1. w As stated in fhe camp fme wave. : ‘? HkGH CGURT OF CHHATTXSGARH : BILASPUR WRW PE‘HTBON (S3 NO. 6276 OF 2011 (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the SingEe Bench :Hon’b‘e Shri Sati$h K. Agnihotri! J. Present :- Shri Sun“ Sam, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Arun $30, Govt Advocate for the State. ORDER (Passed on this 29‘“ day of October, 201 ’9) ‘:. Learned counse) appearing far the pet‘rtioner, on instrudéons, seeks permiss‘ron of this Court to withdraw this petition on the gmund that the petitioner wants to make a representation before the respondent authorities. it its ordered as prayed for. Aocordingiy‘ the writ petition is dismissed as withdraWn with the above—stated submission. I Sd/- SATISH K ANGNIHORI Judge Versus of Chhamsgam & Others RESPONDENTS State