)3^: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DIVISION BENCH Coram : HON'BLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA, C.J. & HON'BLE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINHA.J. PETITIONERS .i'.\ Writ Petltion No. 1648 of 2004 1. Dr. Ritesh Kans'&l, son of Late Shri IVI.L. Kansal, resident of 8, VardhmanColony, Jagdalpur. 2. Dr. Sanjay Kumar, son of Late S. S. Tiwari, Adult, resident of MIG- 111/268, HUDCO, Bhilai, District Durg. 3. Dr. Madhu Bhavana, Son of Shri Venkata Kirshnaiah,! c/o Jagdish Soni, Tehsilpara, Narayanpur (Post), District Bastar. 4. Dr. Manoj Kumar Gupta, son of Shri Ramesh Babu Gupta, c/o P.K. Gupta, resident of N.H. Colony, Vivekanand Nagar, Raipur. RESPONDENTS Versus 1. State of Chhattisgarh through;the Secretary, Department of Pubiic Heaith and Famity Welfare and Medical Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 2. Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University, thorugh its Registrar, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The Dean, Pt. Jawahar Lat Nehru Medical College, Raipur(C.G.) 4. The Board of Higher Secondai'y Education, through its Controller, Raipur(C.G.) 5. Medical Council of India, Aiwan-E- Galib Mai^, Kotta Road, New Delhi-110002 i<..- 6. Director, Health Services, Govt. of Chhattisgarh, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Writ Petition under Article 226 and 227 ofthe Constitutjon of India Present: Shri Kshitij Sharma, coynsel for the petitioners. Shri NK Agrawa!, Deputy Advocate General for the State / respondents No.1, 4 & 6. Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, Advocate on behaif of Shri RS Marhas. counsel for resoondent No.5. ORDER ith (18m August, 2008) The following order of the Court was passed by Rajeev Gupta, C.J.: Shri NK Agrawal, leamed Deputy Advocate General for the State submitted that the petition fited by the petitioners in the year 2004 challenging the counseling for admission to the PGseats in the year 2004 has now become infructuous. 2) Shri Kshitij Sharma, learned counset for the petitioners submitted that on the strength of interim order dated 02.07.2004, the petitioners were given weightage of 5% marks Tor the admission in PG course on account ofthe services rendered by them in the rural areas and the dismissal ofthe writ petition as infructuous may come in theirway in continuing their further studies. 3) The interim order passed by this Court on 02.07.2004 was partly modified by the Apex Court vide order dated 12.07.2006 passed inSLP No(s) 16187-16190/2004. i|;i- 4). During the course of hearing, learned counset for the parties agreed that the writ petition may be disposed of in terms of interim order dated 02.07.2004 as modified by the Apex Court vide orderdated 12.07.2006. 5) The writ petition, therefore, stands disposed of in termsof the interim order dated 02.07.2004 as modified by the Apex Court vide order dated 12.07.2006_ Sd/- Chief Jusdce Judge Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge