HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH m CORAM: HON’BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, OJ. HON'BLE SHRI $UNIL KUMAR $ENHA, J. Writ Petition No. 809 of 2005 1, Lakhanial Dhurve, Ex-Up-Sarpanch, Gram Panchyat Lacha’np'ur, (Kima), aged about 52 years, S/o Bikauram. 2. Atmaram Sahu, Ex-Sarpanch, Gram Panchyat Lachanpur (Kima), aged about 53 years. 3. Dhuniram Sahu Ex-Up-Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Lachanpur (Kima), S/o; Ramnath Sahu aged about 52 years. Nakul Prasad Verma Gram Patel Gram ‘Panchayat Lachanpur (Kima), 3/0. Lt. Balaram Verma aged about 53 years. 5. Radha Valiabh Shukia Ex—Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Lachanpur (Kima), S/o. Ramratan Shukla aged about 61 years. 6. Dukhidas Kotwar Village, Kima S/o. ’ Jahanidas aged about 65 years. All residents of Village Kima P.0. Panderbhatta Tehsil Mungeli Dist. Biiaspur. etitione Prs VERSUS Respondents State of C.G. through Secretary Department of Irrigation D.K.S. Bhawan- Raipur. 2. Conector, Bilaspur Executive Engineeri Irrigation department Mungeii Division Tahsil Mungeii Dist: Biiaspur. >/ . M@ Sub Divisional Officer irrigation Subdivision Thakhatpur Tahsil Mungeli Dist: Bilaspur. 5. Chandrshas Shukla Assistant Engineer Irrigation Department, in- charge Tesua Diversion Thakhatpur, dist Biiaspur (C.G.) 6. Ravi Mohan Assistant Engineer, H incharge, (Jamha Aagar divereio‘n) Irrigation Subdivision Thakhatpur dist Biiaspur (C.G.) . . Natwar Agrawai irrigation Contractor 'Tesua Diversion Rio Baradwar, Dist. Jangir Champa (C.G.) Writ Petition under Article 2261227 of the Constitution of india Present : Shri Vimiesh Bajpai, counsei for the petitioners. Shrt Kishore Bhaduri, Additional Advocate Generat for the State I respondents No.1 to 4._ Shri 8RJ Jaiswai, counsel for respondent No.5. r 8hri Shaiiendra Shukia, counsel for respondent No.6. ORDER (25m August, 201a) The foiiowing order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J. Shri Kishore Bhaduri, learned Additional Advocate General has raised a preliminary objection about the maintainability of the writ petition in the form of ‘Public interest Litigation’ as the petitioners have personal interest in the matter. 2) Shri Vimlesh Bajpai, learned counsel for the petitioners, in view of the above preliminary objection, seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition filed by the petitioners as ‘Pubiic interest NJ o OW Litigation’ with the liberty of filing another petition in their individual capacity for the redressai of their grievances. 3) Permission granted. 4) With the above iiberty, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn; M tz/ A”, k \ Sd/- 7i - ‘ Smm KUMAR smHA axe Judge Sdl— Chief Justice v ‘\