t Respondenfe* lii.O H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISG^H AT BiLASPUR W.P.No.1590of20<» Petitioner M/s. Yasini Construction Company, , A-IV Class Contractor, Rani Road, A!i Manzil, Korba (C.G.) Represented through its partner Syed Furgat A!i Yasini, S/o. Haji Syed Masru Hussain, R/o. Behind Middle School, Yasini Manzil Chowk, Mohalla Ward No.1, House No. 285, Rsmsagar Para, Korba (C.G.) Versus 1. Stats of Chhatttsgarh Through ite Secretary, Water Resources Departmsnt, Mantralaya, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Officer on Special Duty, Water Resources Department, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Enginser-in-Chisf, Water Rssources Department, Raipur (C.G.) 4. Chief Englneer, Hasdeo Bango Project, Bilaspur (C.G.) 5. Superintending Engineer, Hasdeo Projsct Circte, Rampur, Korba (C.G.) 6. Executive Engineer, MmmaiSt Bango Canal Diwsion No.3, Sakti, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) 7. Sub-DM. Offlcer, Hasdeo Cana! Sub-Division Jaijaipur, District JanJgir-Champa (C.G.) E^ WRiT PETITiON UNDER ARTSCLE 228/227 OF THE CONSTiTUTION OF iNDIA SB: Hon'bfs Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. ^--^ Smt. Fouzis Mirza, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Govt. Advocateforthe respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on this 21a day of November, 2007) 1. Learned counsei appearlng for the petitioner submits at the pstitioner seeks compHance of the Setter dated 8.4.2002 (Ainexure •^ f1$ issued by the Chief Enginser, MJns Mata (Hasdev) Bango Pf,) i •^. \ ^ 2 Project, Bilaspur, addressed to the Superintending .Engineer, Hasdev Project Dh/ision, Rampur/Korba. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondentSi'State submits that pursuant to the tetter datsd 8.4.2002 (^inexure P/1) fte fma! measursmsnt has bsen duly Saken and ttie same has been accepted by the petitioner on 24.7.2002 (Annexure 'A' filed with ttie afRdavit dated 20.11.2007). 3. Learned counse! appearing for the respondente/Sfate furfter submite that sufcsequent decision has been taken after hsving taken the finai decision. Therefore, it is expected that after taking fina! measurement, pursuant $o the order dated 8.4.2002, the Stete •A'ouid tsks consequential steps, if not already done. 4. In view of the abovs, nothing surv'ives in this matter. the petition is disposed of, No order asto costs. Accordinflty Thakur Sd/- Satish K.Agnihotri Judge 'v. ^.