Pefitioner Versus Responden'rs 1. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH: BIIASPUR Single Bench: Hon‘ble Shri Sa'rish K. Agniho‘rri. J. w. P. (5) (PR) No. 322g qf zoos Ku. Archana Banjare, D/o Lafe Shri Kayafram Banjare, Aged abouf 23 year, R/o - Viilage - Pas? Dhabham, Tah.- Dabham, Dist - janjgir — Champa (C.&) The Sm're of Chhaf‘risgarh , Through :- The Secrefary, Schooi Educa‘i'ion Depar‘rmenf, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur' (6.6.) ‘ The Union of India, Through: — The Chief Secrefary, Human Resources Deparfmen'r, New Delhi. The Coliecfor Roigarh, Disf - Roigarh (6.6‘) TheDis‘l'ricf Education Officer Jonjgir, Disf‘l'. * Jonjgir-Champa (C.6.) The Block Educa'i'ion Officer Janjgir- Champa. Disi'r. - Janjgir Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CON5TITUTION OF INDIA Shri Vijay Deshmukh, Advocate for fhe pe‘l'H-ioner. Shri P. K. Bhoduri, Panel Lawyer for The responden‘rs. (Passed on fhis 7"“ day of August, 2008) ORDER 1. Learned counsel appearing for ‘rhe pefi'rioner, on ins‘rrucfions, submifs fhaf The pefi'rioner seeks To wifhdraw fhis pe‘rifion. 2. Learned counsel appearing for fhe respondents has no objection. 3. In view of fhe above, fhe pe'ri‘rion is dismissed as wi'l'hdrawn. Sdl- Satish K. Agnihotri " Judge Thakur