IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE QF CHHATTISGARH $ AT BILASPUR ”Mo ~ éb‘lo/m Writ petition U l s 226, 227 of the Indian Constitution PetiLion tiled bxLthe pejtitioner in person without anv gdvgcatg. / R.K. Bhargava 65 yeams _ Vijaypuram E-57 Chattidih, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.]) VERSUS , 1. State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur Petitioner Respondent No. 1 / 2. Sr. Adv. DR. Shanna Binoba Nagar L/4 Qtr. No. D/49 Biilaspur Respondent No.2 In brief please read as under : Petitioner Respondent State Bar Council COMPLAINT AGAINST SR. ADVOCATE D.R.SHARMA FILED ON 23/09/2008 BEFORE THE S.B.C. SINCE NO ACTION THIS WRIT COMEI;/’// M,” . w-Nq we) jk) .97 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) (PR) NO.1232 OF 2010 P ETITIONER R.K. Bhargava Versus RESPONDENTS State Bar Council of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur & Another (Writ petition under Article 226, 227 of the Cohstitution of India). Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Psent :- None for the petitioner. re (Passed on this 20 day of September, 2010) The matter is called for hearing. Despite notice of the Registry with regard to the fixed date of'hearing i.e. 20/09/2010, none appears nor is any representation made on behalf of the petitioner in person. The petitioner may not be interested in the matter. ln view of the above. the writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution Registry is directed to send a copy of the order to the petitioner in person forthwith. i l 3di- 1,. J Satish K.Agnihotri ORDER (ORAL) m . r