N .THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPU 5‘ ' ‘- Anand Gupta,» e about ' y‘ear S/o R.R.’Gupt f ‘ ’ a yr, a Agd 34 s a, ? Smt. Anupamlain,‘ ' Aged 35 years W/o SajeeV Jain n' yal i Shaml Soman Agd abt 38 years e ou ,S/o Late Lalchnd Somani a me oni Rash S ma Aged abo 42 year ut s S/o Lat alchad'Somani e Bn. Smt. Preti Mundhara e e ot e / sh 1 are reidents f Shanti Niktan A1 s o e, OppE Rajkumar Ollege Mai Gat, Chbe Coln, Tah &_Dstt. Raipr (G) C n e ou oy i u C.. VS ERSU Commissioner, Municipa Cororaton, aviya oa, Tah & Distt, Raipur (C.Ga) esonden Rpts 1 R ' 11?) /2002 ,Writ Petition No. Petitioners ’ Agd abu 35 yars Wo Saikant Mundhara l pi Ml Rd Amr Singh Sahela a S y g , /o Late Abha Sinh Sahela nd mt. Anju in‘'ha /o r. Dinesh Sinha t A S Sgl W M gl Occupaion Businesi, /o Raiur and hilaifsp’ec’tivel esidents o Shanti N-iketan . Rajkumar Collee Main ate hoube Coon, ah & Distt. Raiur. /s. ia Jot nterprse M Vjy yi Eis partnersip irm having its 2 (T), office at wo Aih Ng, rant Apartment Laxmi a‘a’r ‘aur (Maarastra RG. llco Lmd .P. Cem iite ura partment atora aa aipur ( \ RIT PETITION UDER ARTICLE 226% 227 E CONSTITUTION OF’I articulars, of the_petitione‘r As iven in the cause title articulars o the ‘respondent s given in 'tlie' case title culrs of te order; agglins hic petition is mad R p B‘gy R f , Opp g, G, C ly T p A h f ’Ngp h) Sy A, K Tlb R C.G.) W N OF TH NDIA P s g . P f s : A u . Partia h t Wh e : iXUs“A ” ‘ ’ g HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION NO.1258 OF 2002 1 § PETITIONERS Anand Gupta & 4 Others Versus RESPONDENTS Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Raipur & 3 Others (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Singie Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- None for the petitioners. Shri Vivek Chopra, Advocate for the respondent No.4. 33"” ORDER (ORAL) r, V (Passed on this 22nd day of October, 201 0) E \ " 1‘ The matter is called for hearing, None appears nor is any i representation made on behalf of the petitioners. The petitioners may not be interested in pursuing the matter. 2. In View of the above, the matter is dismissed for want of prosecution. Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotri " l . Judge J; 1 l Amit l