H; t \Vbm $1117 “$3.7; 'J‘w. ~ A: ¢~wwri k IBH ‘ uu Ar $1.2“ . N&@&0F 19 97. Petitignerz" Ggnm BAHRM, Ageu about 45 Years, $/O $ DawwR ‘‘A, NMEDAR/ Assiman‘t Revenue wSlvEcToa, Mtgnici‘pal Council Smgp” Tansii gmm” ulstrj, ct 1-: AEPU‘gm .L .) Versus Respogdents gijn e st me of méldnya Prémiaah , Man Tnl‘ougn. tral aya gecrm , Empa‘l my (urb (MJ an . ) "admin istrat ian ) , The B;r&ctor of Uxban ladmifxistrsitign, maohya prad€§$h , wagggmy .) *TEE Chief MuniC 3. The @‘%§9&§ Muni $L¢£32$u Tafmil amua, District aExi‘igur why“) Pat "tion U/A 226/227 of‘ thz": QmSt iiu'ticn of may-i f0: issuan ce ‘;f writ/c'réer oz Directions in 131% natur& of mi]: :3f came: ari/Egwnaamu 3/ writ. gf l'ronlbitien MC. l. y&xti_culars cf the getitignergg- \ 1l\B)\"‘ ‘\ , a h 1 aT " wt‘“ HIGH CQURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BILAS?UR $ingle Bench: lion’ble Shxi Satish K. Agnihotxi, J a W. P. No. 3986 of 1997 Petitioner Gajndram Daharia. Vsrsus Raspondents The Stata of MP, & ath€rs Shn‘ SP. Shanna, counsel with Shri Vinay Pandsy, counsel for tha petitioner, Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel lawyer for the State. Miss Shannila Singhaj, counsel for the respondent No.3. ORAL QRDER (3rd July, 2005) L-eamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this matter has become infructuous, as several transfers have taken place after the impugned order was passed. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents, do not oppose the prayer, 2, Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. 77 t r 1. 7" ” W Sm. SATISH K. AGN‘HOTRI Judge \\