4.'\. ^ -S' 2. S- ^f^'!0^^' IS THE M HZ& PBffiBgH SIAIE A3MENISrmM'IV"B [HEIBUNiL PBINCIP&L BSBCH M J1MLPUB (H.P.) o .&^0^7'OP 1995 BOBSBi^ DBWMGM, t&BQ ?9 . IB^BS, S/O.BAGHUmE, mCU; £gGN,'G/0.^&LB8 2M'OEFICEB, BIIASPUR ClBCLE-II, BIL&SPUK .<M.]P.) -Y- 1) SIl.rS Oy M&&HYA. PMDSSH 2HSOUGH: SBGBSIAE? BSPABIMMI 0¥ SALSB' TAX VALLABH BHAWM BHOPM (M.P.) 2) DI¥ISIOIAL BY.COMCESSIOIEE IAX BIL.&SPUB M¥ISION . BIL&3PUE .(M.P.5 3) SAL33S TM.O^FIGEE • BILASPUK CIEGLE-II BILISPUS (M.P.) APPLICMI s s Q3STM.LS OP M>PLlGAa:lQN d? HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPLICANT WRIT PETITION (S) No, 1042 of2005 Bodlii'am Dewangan. RESPONDENTS VERSUS State ofMadhya Pradesh & Others. .^PPLICATION UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT, 1985 SB: Hon'ble Slui Satish K. Agiuhotri, J. Present: None for the petitioner. Sliri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel La^yer forthe State/respondents. ". ORDERCORAL) (Passed on 27 day ofOctober, 2009) 1. The matter is called for hearing twice. None appears nor any representation is made on behalfofthe petitioner. The petitioner may not be interested in pursuing the matter. 2. In view ofthe above, the matter is dismissed for want ofprosecution. 3. Registiy is directed to send a copy ofthis order to the petitioner, forthwith. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Aimt