BEFORE TEE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISHGARH AT BEAS?UR IN THE MATER OI? WA). Na 3'7 £3 2. 32033 / MUNICIPAL CORPORA’I‘ION RAWANDGAON, A/VN THROUGH TEE COWHSSIGMMWCEAL CORI’OMTION, DISTRAJNANDGAQN {(3.6) I’ETITIONERS g? :9? VERSUS 1.3TATE OF CHHA'I'E‘ISGARH, THRQUGE TEE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT, OF CHHATTISGARH, LABQUR DEARMNT, 3K3 WYA‘ mm {c.G) u: 2.THE DELPUI‘Y LABOUR COMMISSmNER, @l6 .‘....- n RESPONDENT / // CTII-IA’I'HSGARH, GEEI'ANJALI NAGAR KAIPUR(C.G) 3 . fRESlDING OFFICER, LABQUR COURT WANDGAaN, RAJNANDGAOMC‘G) 4.6mm sATrAR, 3/0 31mmsmma SANAR, R10 MQHADmARD No.44, MDHARA’ DISTRAJNANDGAON (CG) / WE PEIIIIGN UNDER ARTICLE 22§i227 OF THE CONSTHUTIOH OF INDIA FDR ISSUA CE 6F A WRIT IN TEE NATURE OF CERTIDRARI AND OR ANY OTEER WEI! ORDER OR DIRECTION AS MAY 3E DEEMED FIT "AMA.“A,“ , k “ HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I‘TISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Pe‘rition No. 3792 of 2003 Peiitionar Municipal Corporation Rajnandgaon Versus Respondants State of Chhatti$garh &, Others (Wn't P€tition under Article 226/ 227 of the Constitution oflndia) (SB: Hon’ble Shn' Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shn P1 adeep Saxena, Advocate for the petltxoner Shn Yashwant Smgh Thakur Deputy Advocate General for the respondents No. 1 to o.‘ z, " Shn' H. B. Agalwal, Senior Advocate with Ms Itu Réff Mukhaljee, Advocate for the respondent No.4. a 0 R D E R éoraly ( Passed on this 20m day of January, 2010 ) Heard. 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the impugned order the reliefs have been ranted. g Accordingly, this writ petition has become‘infmctuous. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents agree with the above submission made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. In View of the foregoing, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. CO Sdl SaushK Agmhow‘ o x udge \ Thakur ;