IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATI‘ISGAR’H : BILASPUR WP. S’ No. 4457 of 2008 Petitioner Sitaram Pradhan, S/o Jivm‘dhan Pradhan, aged about 31 yeam, R/o Village $5 Post Pandaripani, Tahsil Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus Respondents 1, The State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretaxy, Department of Paxichayatr8afRural Development, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). Deputy Director, Panchayat Social Welfare Department, Mahasamund, Distn'ct Mahasamlmd (C.G.) i 3. Chief Executive Oiiicer, Janpad Panchayat — Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) 4. The Saxpanch, (“ram Panehayt Paiidaxipani, Tahsil (C.G.) — Salaipali, District Mahasamund § 5. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Pandaxipani, Tahsil — Saraipali, District Mahasamund (C.G.) go WRIT PETITION UNDER AR’I‘ECLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotii J.) Shri Raghvendra Pradhan, Advocate fogthe petitioner. Ms Smitha Ghai, Panel Lawyer for the respondents No. 1 and 2. ; None for the respondent No.3 despite service ofnotice. Shri Pushpendm Patel, Advocate for the respondents No. 4 and 5. G R D E R (Passed on this 26th Day of March, 2009) 1. The petitioner has nled this petition challenging the procedure adopted by the respondents in appointment of Panchayat Karmi. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the advertisementfnotice was published on 25.7.2008 (Annexure P/ 1), inviting applications up to 1.8.2008 i.e. within seven days, contrary to the guidelines framed for appointment of Panchayat Karmi, which have become statutory in View of the fact that the said guidelines have been issued in exercise of the powers under . Section 69(1) read with Section 70(1) of the Panchayat Raj Adhjniyam, 1993. ClauS€ 4.2 of te uidelines provides tha the h g t candidates can make applications within 1 ays from the date 5 d ofpulication of the avertisement] notice. b d Learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 4 an 5 airly d f submits that there was some screpancy in the di advertisement] notice. The respondes No. 4 and 5 ave cided nt h de to issue a fresh advertisement/notice inviting applications for appointment on the post of Panchayat K after having armi provided clear 15 days for making applications. 4. In View of the foregoing, according to learned cousel appearng n i for the petitioner nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 5. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of. No order asto costs. O C Sd/- is I,” Sath K. Agnihotri Thakur . Judge ’