•FR c-T^ Li<-^/^ ^INGLE BEIII IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P. NOK) C~?3& /2006 PETITIONERS ^ M ^^w/ ^// ^^y '/KY / ^ -^ ,1 *i <,^^ .'.-»- ^" ^ -s.-' <se..' ^w .4. ^o-c0^ ^^^'r 0^%WV&' Saurabh Dwivedi, S/o. Shri L.N. Dwivedi, aged about 35 years, R/o. GV- 81, Geetanjali Vihar, Phase-II, Ameri road, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.). A.K. Jha, S/o. Shri V. Jha, aged about 50 years, R/o. GV- 84, Geetaajali Vihar, Phase- II, Ameri road, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.j. Anil Pimpley, S/o. Shri Late M.S. Pimpley, aged about 52 years, R/o. GV- 90, Geetanjali Vihar, Phase- II, Ameri road, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.). B.D. Mitrani, S/o. Shri Moti Ram Mitrani, aged about 50 years, R/o. GV- 90, Geetanjali Vihar, Phase- II, Aineri road, Nehru Nagar, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.). o ^ VERSUS ^- RESPONDENTS , 1. Municipal Corporation, Through Commissioner, Nagar Palik Nigam, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur. (C.G.) I 2. State of Chhattisgarh, Through District Collector, BUaspur (C.G.) ^3. S.R. Sahu, M/s. Geetanjali Constructions, R/o. Geetanjali Bhavan, Ameri Road, Nehru Nagar Bflaspur (C.G.) / WRIT PETITION UNDER^ARTICLE 226/227 OF__THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS. PROHIBITIOW. CERTIORARI ETC. OR ANY OTHER DIRECTION ^R_QRDER TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER ^VSWSsS^S !;KB®8Bg— sSKiSS9S^& :^'^:^;^^s^^^ ^/•^;"::-;^si^lffiNI^ ;;":^%^%^^^ HIGH COURTOF CHHATTiSGARHAT BiLASPUR WRIT PETITION (C)NO. 6730of2006 Saurabh Dwivedi & Others Versus Respondents Municipa! Corporation & Others WR!T PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA (SB : Hon'ble Wr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- Shri Sunil Otwani, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.S. Kachhwaha, Advocats for the respondent No-1. » Shri N.N. Roy, Parie! Lawyer for the State/respondent No2. Shri Malay Shrivastava, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. ,th Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits ihat relief souaht for in this satisfied by the 1 for adiudication. petition, has atready respondents. Thus, nothing remains in this petiti The petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition, as havinc become infructuous. 2. No obiection from other side. 3. lt is ordered, as prayed for. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed, as having become Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Arun