f- (<y^7 a^ci F ^h ^"il,%^^- iy^^l&^''2"' 1 J^--^ c»s?"i1"""" IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. /2010 PETITIONER '^;'- RESPONDENTS ^^/>/f'/ ^^ ^^y ''n/ 1-'^< ..^° y Surendra Kumar Borkar, S/o. Shri Sata-naram Bokar, Aged about 47 years, R/o. Bank Colony, Bade Rampur, Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS 1. Chairman, Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Raipur (CG). 2. General Manager, Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank, Regional Office, Raigarh (CG). 3. Branch Manager, Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank, Branch- Badebhandar, Raigarh (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA N sSKSs^SSS:s'S'Ss^-' »--^SSi"v!S7!9^,•i'^sS^S^SSi' 9. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 818 OF 2010 Surendra Kumar Borkar Versus Chairman, Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank & others (Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Rahul Tamaskar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Pramod Verma, Senior Advocate with Shri Raghvendra Verma, Advocate for respondents. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 30th day ofApril, 2010) By this petition, the petitioner challenges the legality and validity of the order dated 29/01/2010 (Annexure P-1), whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Badebhandar, District Raigarh to Baramkela, District Raigarh. 2) Shri Verma, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the impugned order dated 29/01/2010 has been cancelled subsequently by order dated 15/04/2010. Thus, the order impugned herein is not in existence. 3) In view of foregoing, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner nothing survives in this petition for adjudication and the petition has become infructuous. 4) Accordingly, this petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Ashok Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge