i^ 1 ^ . r;' *;-' "^ s/ '•'./ '--.;.:;•;^.^-•~ 't>7 f^t •^J HIGH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH. BIL^PUR WritPetitlon No. 4S83/1997 PETITIONER8 1. Rambedi Arora, s/o Rajkumar Arora, aged about 28 years Rajendra Kuniar S/Q Laxmaadas Wadhwani, aged about 28 years, Vishnu Sachdev, s/o Dariyaaamal Sachdev, aged about 30 years, 4. Vijay Kuiuar, s/o Varaudmal Lakhwani, aged about 30 years, 5. Arjunlal Nebhani, s/o Aiiui&al Nebhani, aged about 28 years 6. Girish Kumar, s/o Harish KuinaT, aged about 22 years, 7. Hafiz Ahiaad Rizvi, s/o Ajij Ahmad Rizvi, aged about 40 years, 8. Darvesh KIiatri, s/o Rakhitual aged about 30 years, 9. Shiv Kumar Gaugwani, s/o Chaad Gaagwani, aged about 35 years, 10. Boondabhai, s/o Mauglubha4 aged about 30 years, 11. Mazhar Hussaia, s/o Sharafat Hussain, aged about 27 years, 12. Sabira W/o Maqsood, aged about 30 years, 13. Farida Bano, w/o Sayeed, aged about 28 years, W.P.No.4583/1997 :3 14. Badral Hussaio., s/o Gauhar aged about 32 years, 15, Qadar Hussain, s/o Tayka Hussaai, aged about 26 years, 16. Tarannuin, w/o A&oz, aged about 22 years. 17. Parveen, d/o •Akna AIi, aged about 18 years, 18. Javed Kamdar, s/o Rajjab Kamdar, aged about 25 years, 19. Iqbal s/o GaBFar Bhai, aged about 23 years, Respondents 20 Ali Raja S/o Sultaa AU, aged about 30 years, AU petitiouers residents of KaUbadi Chowk, Raipur, Tahsil and Distt. Raipur(C.G) VersMS 1 The Municipal Corporation, Raipur, Tahsil & Dista-ict, Raipur (C.G) 2. The Coimnissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G). 3. Raipiur Development Authority, Raipur, a body iacorporated under Section 31 of M.P. Nagar Tafha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, having its o£5ce-at G.E. Road, Raipur(C.G). 4. Deputy Mayor, Municipal Corporation, Raipur (C.G) Appearance : Sbri Vinay Pandey, counsel for fhe petitioners. \ Shri H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Shri Paukaj Agrawal, for fhe respondents. W.P.No.4583/1997 QRALORDBR 114.02.2008^ SUNIL KUMAR 8INHA. J. Heard. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learued Seuior Advocate, appearmg for the respondents submits that if the applications are made by fhe petitioners for allotment ofalteraate sites, fhe petitioners wiU be aBotted alteniate sites and necessaiy consequential docuiuentation wfll be done as earty as possible giving preference to the choice of the petitioners. The order wiU be passed wifhia a penod of tsvo weeks fixim fhe date of receipt of fhe appUcation filed by the petitioners. In view of fhe above statement niade at fhe Bar by leamed counsel for the respondents, leamed counsel for fhe petitioners submits that now nothmg survives in fhis petition. He also submits that ahnost sinular petition bearing W.P.No.641/ 1994 has also been disposed of on fhe same tenns. In view of the above, this writ petition is accordingly disposed ofwifh a direction to the petitioners that, if so advised, they inay make applications witfaiu a period of one week from today before flie conceraed autborily of fhe respondents. However, fhe interun reUef graated earUer witl coatm.ue till tbe order is passed by fhe concemed authority offhe respondents. Wifh the aforcsaid observations/direction, this petitioa stauds finaUy disposed of. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge /Rao/