wwwwwwwmm W; 2003 amm (W) mmm mmm mmm WW§WW $aifmm PETlTlONERS: Respondent N05 Anil Kumar Pandey, Son of Late Sri Radhehari Pandey, aged abeut 44 years, Resident of Sri Sawamangla ‘ Devi Mandir Parisar, Durpa (Korba), Tahsii - Katghora, District Biiaspur (CG) Ravibhushan Pratap Singh, Son of Bodhsharan Pratap Singh, aged about 5O years! Resident of Rajgarhi, Korba, Tahsi‘ Korba, District Korba (CG) ’ersus- Gambhir Singh, Son of Late Gendali Singh, Aged about 59 years, Resident of Mudapar (Via Korbi), Tahsii -— Paii, District Korba (CG) Meenu Trivedi Joshi, wife of Ashwin Joehi, aged about 38 years, Resident of 199, indira Commercial VCOmpiex, Transport Nagar, Korba, Tahsit & District Korha (CG) State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Chief Secretary, Mantraiaye, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Distt. Raipur(CG) Devi Maa shree Sarva Mangia Tempie Durpa (Korba), Tahsii Katghora, Distt. Korba (CG),' Respondent No.6 RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER No.1 PETiTiONER No.2 RESPGNDENT No.1 RESPON DENT No.2 madtagawn. , 3a W, WW @Ern‘gg? RESPONDENT No.3 5‘ hands, as they suppressed the No.5 & 6 and others pending in thj The Collector, Korba, Distt. Korba (CG) Municipal Corporation, Korba, through Municipal Commissioner, Saket Bhawan, Korba, Tahsil and Distt. Korba (CG) Division Bench: Hon. Shri Dhirendra Mishra & W Hon. Shri R.N. Chandrakar, JJ. 28-10-2009:— Shri Mano} Paranjpe, couns ! Shri Ravindra Agrawal, Pan i Heard. . By this review petition, th respondents No.5 and 6 in Wri prayed for reviewing the order da petition was disposed of after rec rding submission of learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 3. This review petition has be that the petitioners in the said p ition did not come up with the clean ariier litigation between respondents competent civil Court for the applicants. Lawyer forthe State applicants, who were arrayed as Petition (PIL) No.2169/2009, have ed 7*“ July, 2009 whereby the above filed by the applicants on the ground nwmwmmww.Wwrwm RESPONDENT No.4 6. i WWf wm; wi 2Q? mentiw (W W mm Wmmw‘ am 3mm amiar W WWw‘m w,- “ ‘W‘g - t '32“: a any“ ‘W‘Wg‘f .1"; A ,g? “p WK V l Through the Collector, Korba, Distt. Korba (CG) 3a 1mm, wmeg. famtm I M g W$W . W i‘ Zcga ‘ um? W??? (1m? fT WWW "' ‘ . (fig$1; mmw‘w m3: W 4 From perusal of the order u er review, it is ciear that the right of any party to the proceedings has iot been adjudicated and the petition mW) has been disposed of after recoiding submission made by learned w counsel for respondents No.1 and 3. in View of the above fact, no ground for reviewing the impugned order is made out. The petition is accordingiy dismissed 5C“ Sdl- Dhlrendra . M15 _ hra ‘ Rangnath Chandrakar Judge Jmige