J^"—- c/- -S.\oQ'^ iS?iMR,S QiSSilKiHi ijMSSjia" In the Honble Hizh Court ofJudicature of Chhattishearh at Bilasnur (C.G.) W.P. N o..........S^tS......... 200S^ r "./^ ^p%^> s ^^f/ ^s^ .>^y ^>y ^/" y~ ^ Petitioner B.L.Patle aged 51 years Son of late Shri Tarachand Patle, Sahayak Yantri, Tandula Division, Durg (C.G.) Versus Respondents ^ ^ .< ./ /' < .'•>' ^ .<?- y ^o^ o- v .<v ovv .^ ' 1. The State Govemment ofChhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, Jal Sansadhan Department Ministry, D.K.S.Bhavan, Raipur(C.G.) ^2. The State Govemment ofMadhya Pradesh, Through the Secretary, Jal Sansadhan,Deptt. Bhopal (M.P.) fi Writ Petition under Articles 226/227^f the ConstitutioiLof INDIA » 'Y\\ Gowri HiGHCQURTOF CHHATriSGARH : BILASPUR PETtTIONER WRIT PETITION N0.3243 OF 2006 B.P. Patie The State Government of Chhattisaarii & Another petition under Arttoie 226/227 of the Constitution of irsdia) Singie Bench : Hon'bte Shri Satish K. Agnihobi, J. Present:" Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioner. Ms Smita Ghai, PL for the State. (Passed o" thjs 11 day of Swtember, 2009) 1. Heard iearned counsd for the oarties. 2. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits thal againsi th® impugned order dated 29-5-2000 (Annexure - P/1), the petitioner preferred statutory appeal, the same is sUH pending consideraiion and, as such, the petitioner does not want to cont^t the mafier, ai this stage and he prays that the petitioner may be permified to wtihdraw this petition. However, learned counsei submte ihat the petittonar may be granted iiberty to fite peSition after disposd of the appeai, if cause of acfion survives, to which teamed counsel appearing for Ihe State has no objection. 3. if is ordered, as prayed for. 4. Accordingty, the wrst petition is dismissed as wnthdrawn wrth the aforesaid Hberty. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge