IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. ICI No. (q6@ ‘ OF 2009. PETITIONER M’Shd. Farm, Son of Shri Abdul Kadir, aged about 3O years, R/o. C-18, Sector -5, Devendra Nagar, Raipur, District Raipur (C. G.). VERSUSW RESPONDENTS :1. yyState of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Transport Department, D.K.S. jBhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 2. Regional Transport Authority, Raipur, Region, D. K. S. Bhawan, Raipur} District Raipur (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ‘ CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BLLASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 6080 of2009 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shxi Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Alok Bakshi, Government Advocate for the State/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 24 day ofOctober, 2009) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, on instructions, submits that the petitioner does not want to contest this petition on merits at this stage. However, the respondent-authorities may be directed to consider and decide his pending applicagegdated 04m Febmmy, 2009 (Annexure P/l) in accordance with law, on its own merits, as expeditiously as possible. 2. Shri Bakshi, learned Government Advocate for the respondents submits that there is no reason asto why the application of the petitioner, as stated above, should not be considered expeditiously. Shri Bakshi submits that the aforestated application. shall be considered and decided by the concerned authority, in accordance with law, on its own merits, Within a period oftwo weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 3. In View of the clear statement made by learned counsel appearing for the respondents, according to learned cOunsel for the petitioner, nothing survives for adjudication. 4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. No order asto cost. Sd/- SATISH K. AGNIHOTRP. f 7' Judge . 5' i . I? I as £<~ PETITIONER Mohd. Farid. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & another.