Ri IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAHISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIONCC ) N0. A-^8 OF 2007 PETITIONER N^-P.f'PLlCM-'TS \°'!.-<^£^. ^^"" ^^ C3 %<>'/~AY^ ^ \iy" 1. Dharmendra Kosley, Aged About- 41 Years, S/o- R.D, Kosley, Panch of Ward No.12, Gram Panchayat - Jondhara. 2. Babulal Chandel, Aged About- 33 Years, S/o- Late Chandan Chandel, Panch of Ward No.03, Gram Panchayat -Jondhara. 3. Sheshnath Chandel, Aged About- 40 Years, S/o- Late Panchram, Panch of Ward No.09, Gram Panchayat - Jondhara. 4. Anil Tamboli, Aged About- 25 Years, S/o- Satruhan, Panch ofWard No.18, Gram Panchayat -Jondhara. 5. Bhuneshwar Tamboli, Aged About- 26 Years, S/o- Bechuram Tamboli, Panch of Ward No.IO, Gram Panchayat -Jondhara, 6. Smt. Kamala Tiwari, Aged About- 48 Years. W/o- Shiv Kumar Tiwari, Panch of Ward No.07, Gram Panchayat -Jondhara. 7. Smt. Kholbaharin Bai, Aged About- 47 Years, fS/o- Tahi, Ram, Panch of Ward No.19, Gram Panchayat Jondhara. All R/o- Village.Jondhara, Thesil-Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur(C.G,) VERSUS ^- RESPONDENT (S): 1 Director of Panchayat, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 2. State ^- 'through of Chhattisgarh Collector, Bilaspur (C.G.) ^S'. Sanjay Patel, S/o- Photoram, Aged About- 33 Years, Sarpanch-Gram Panchayat ,,. Jondhara, R/o- Village- Jondhara, Thesil- Masturl, Dlstt. Bilaspur (C.G.) - (^ffi.-s'-^"''^ 9'rr,. Pt-^ia^ n,s^^ luyo'KrT tirouin' 'TC^C P^.;'^»<»^a~)wjnfcp^Jw <3-- S?^<p2S'^?SW^&r:>:0-^.o , ^^^^DC^'S:^f^^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE'J -wwuc.^r^.^ CONSTITUTIQN OF INDIA tl UlGHCOyFCTCilRJCHHATnSGARHAT Prtltioners WRTr PETITION (Cl N0.62S8 OF 2007 Dharmendra Kosley & Others Versus Respondents . Director of Panehayat & Others WRITBeTITION UNDERARTK;LE2270FTHECON8TITUTION W INDIA » <SB :Mon'bte Mr. Scrtish K.Agnih<^ri,JO , Present;- Shri Vinay Pandey, Advocateforthepetttioners. , Shri N.N.Roy, Panel Lawyer fortheState. Shri Aditya Sharma, Advoeate appears on behatfof Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, Advocate ftirthe respondent No.3. > T. 2. ORDERtCT^AU (Passedon1^l*dayofNovember,^10) Learned counsel appearing Tpr the petitioners submlts that wtth ttte pas^ge pftim^i the p^itiqn has become infructuo'us. Learned counsel appearing fpr pther side do nirt corrtrovert the abovesubnttission. ' 3. tn view of the above.the writ petition isdismissed, as having becomeinfrucfaious; Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge as iok