HIGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH CORAM: HON’BLE sHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, CJ. HON’BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. WRIT PETITION NOM4 of 2004 1. Satrughan Lal, S/o Hirday Ram Gond aged about 24 years, R/o Ruputola Tahsil Gurur, Distt. Durg (C.G,) PETlTlONERs: 2. Santosh Kumar, S/o Late Shri Puneet Ram, Dhankar, Cultivator, Resident of Village Jagtara, P.C.No.13, Tah. Balod, Distt. Durg 3. Bhagvan Singh, S/o Guman Singh Gond, Cultivator. 4‘ Hari Singh, S/o Nohru Gond, (Petitioner 3 and 4 R/o Village Tekhadahra, P.C.No.23, Tah. Balod, Distt. Durg. 5. Hemlal, S/o Gendlal Nishad, Cultivator; 6. Dilip Kumar, S/o Bhanu Ram. 7. Shrawan Kumar, S/o Ghasiya Ram, Nishad. (Petitioner 5, 6, 7 cultivators R/o Village Bhothli, P.C.No.4, Tah. Batod, Distt. Durg, Chhattisgarh. VERSUS 'k. RESPONDENTS: 1. The State oF‘Chhwagttis§arh through the Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Ministry of Rural Development through its Secretary, Secretariat, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Chief Conservator of forest, Raipur. 4. Collector, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) 5. Naib Tahsildar, Gurur, Distt. Durg. Present: None for the petitioners. Shn‘ Kishore Bhaduri, Ad for the State/respondents. QRQER (05m November, 2009) The foliowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, c.J. None for the petitioners. want of prosecution. 3) The writ petition, therefore, prosecution. Sd/— Sdl- Chjef Justice Sunil Kumar Sinnaw 7 4* Judge subbu (Writ Petition under Article 226/22? of the Constitution of india) M..— ditionai Advocate General 2) As there is no representation on behalf of the petitioners, we are left with no other option but to dismiss the writ petition for is dismissed for want of