3> NIil l'" S^Mt^&l ^^^^. ^£;J1|^J^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(S)NO. 'T^^{^>_/2010 PETITIQNER 3^< .•y.-^! ^^^'".^^y ^''«.3^'; ft^ :^' ^s RESPONDENTS 1. Saiyyad Abdul Sahid, S/o late Shri Saiyyad Abdul Wahed, aged about 59 years, R/o Occupation Patwari, presently working at P.H.No. 10 Sonthi, Tehsil & Police Station Sakti, Disst. Jangir-Champa, (CG) VERSUS State Of Chhaftisgarh Through Secretary Department Of Revenue, D.K.8. Bhawan, Raipur (CG) District Collector, Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) - Sub-divisional Officer (Revenue) Sub-Division Sakti District- Janjgir-Champa(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MAJTDAMUS. PROHIBITION. CERTIORARI ETC. OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION OR ORDBR TO DOJUSTICE IN THE MATTER ^ HIGH CQURT QF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR PETmONER WRIT PETmQN (S) No. 4995 of2010 Saiyyad Abdul Sahid. RESPONDENT8 VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Others. x WRIT PETmON UNDER ARHCLE 226 OF THE GONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble SMi Satish K. Agmhotri,J, Preseiit: Shri Sunil Otwani, Ajdvocate fbr the petitioner. Shii Ajay Dwivedi, IDcputy Goveniment Advocate with Shri P.K.Bhaduri., Pajnel Lawyer fbr the State/respondents. QRDER(ORAL) (Passed on 16ttday ofJune, 2011) 1. Leamed counsel appeai'mg fbr the State/respondents submits that the petitioner has already contmued at Patwari Halka No. 10, Sontlii District Jarygir-Champa fbr more fhaii nine months on accouiit of interim order granted by this Court 01.09.2010. The State/respondeirts may be granted liberty to pass appropriate orders keeping in view public mterest and admiiiistrative exigency. Shri Bhaduri.further submits that the State?respondents shall iiot insist upon compliance of the inipugned order dated 27.08,2010 (Aimesure P/l) in respect ofthe petitioner. 2. Atthis stage, when no effect could be given to the impugned order dated 27.08.2010 (Aimexure P/l) on account ofthe interim order dated 01.09.2010, thus, it is not neeessary to go into legality and validity ofthe aforestated impugned order. 3. In view of the above, according to leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing surv7ives inthis petition for adjudication. 4. Accordmgly, the petition stands disposed of No order asto costs. 5. Ititerim relief granted on 01.09.20 10 is vacated. Sd/- ^v ttiotn \ Ainit