Petitioners // ‘3. Ix) Pardeshiram son of Bodhram, aged abeut 45 years, {esident cf viilage Daija, Tahsii-Takhatpur, DEstrici Biiaspur (C.G.) Babu Lai 5cm of Chhedi Lai, ageci 55 years, resident of viliage Kekati, Tahsi! Takhatpur, District Bi!aspur (CG) Chaitram sen of Bhagatram, aged abaut 50 year's, reSia'ent of viilage Bicharpur Kapa Tahsii Takhatpur, Distyist BHaspw ‘(CG} Saukhi Lai son of Charan, aged 50 years, resident of village Rajpur, Tahsil Takhekpur, District Biiaspur (CG) Bhishan Prasad Dubey of Her Praised, aged 55 years, resident of vmege Kethmuda, Tahsi! Takhatpur, Distric’: Biiaspur (CG) Mifthu S‘mgh son of Rambhau. aged 53 years, resident of vilfage — Pakarfya, Tahsii-Takhatpur, District . Bi!aspur (CG) Huiasram scari- o’i Sarriam, aged abou‘: 53 years. reeident of viiiage- Hardi, TehsiivTakhatpur, District Biiaspur (CG) Gaukaran Prasad son of Himhharam, aged about 5O years, , resident of village-Tanda, Tahsil- Takhatpur, District Bilasptir (CG) U1 Harmani Soni, son of Ramji Lai Soni, aged about 51. years, resident ef viiiags-Nirtu Tahsii Takhatpur, District 8iiaspur (CG) ishwar Sannad, sen cf Janakram, aged about 55 years, resident of Viiiege-Bartori, Tahsi! Biiha, Distriat Biiaspur CG Ashok Yadav, son of Faguram Yadsv, aged about 51 years, residsni of viiiage - Bartori, Tahsii- Biiha, District Biiaspur (£16.) Bireridra Kumar Yadav sori oi“ Mahesiiram Yadav, aged about 47 year , resident of viiiage Barteri, Tahsii Biiha, Distrist Biiaspur (CG) Versus Union of india, through — Secretary, Heaith, New Delhi. 'Staie of C‘n’nattisgarh, Through- Secretary, Department of Health, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) Responoien'ts 10. HiGi—i DDURT GF CHHeTTisGARi-i AT DILA3f-3UR Writ Petitiori {$1 No. 7584 or" 299$ 3. Director. Health. D.K.S.’ Bhavam Raipur (ca) 4. Chief Medicai Gfficer, Disirici Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETiTlON UNDER ARTICLE 225 SF THE CGNSTITUHON OF ENDIA (SB: Hon‘ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri) $hri Vimle$h Bajpai, Advccate for the petitioners. Shri ‘r’ashwant $ingh Thakur, Govt Acivoca‘ie for fhe respondents » , No. 2 to 4fState. CREEK (Passed en this 12“? day at my, 2091) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioners submits that the ‘reiief ought for in this petition has already been granted by the concerned authorities. Thus. nothing survives in this matter, to which learned counsei appearing for the respondents No. 2 to ~4 has no objection. 2. The writ petition is accordingty dismissed as having become i Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotr‘i i Judge infructuous. No order as to costs. Thakur