@Ww a HKGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition N0. 3994 of2004 (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 (2) OF THE CONS'H’fUI‘ION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon’hle Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri‘ J.) resent : None for the petitioner. . Shri AS Kachhwaha Deputy Advocate General for the State. bhn B D Guru Advocate tor the respondent No 4 8hr: Pankaj Shrivastava, Advocate appears on behalf of Shri Satlsh (Jupta Advocate tor the respondent No 5 ORAL ORDER (Passed onW 22" nay of January, 2009) 1. The matter is called for hearing twice. 0n both occasions, none appears nor any representation is made on behalf ofthe petitioner. The petitioner may not be interested in the matter. 2. In View ot‘the above, the matter is dismissed for want ot‘prosecution. 3. Consequently, M(W)P No. 4390/04, application for grant ofad interim writ, stands disposed of. Sd/— 7' e Sansh K Agmhom Judge ;( 1/ P PETITIONER : Vinay Kumar Gupta, S/o late Képil Prasad Gupta, aged about 35 years, R/o Parwati Bhawan, Nilanchal Compound, Ram Road, Ranchi (Jhatklmnd). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. The State ofChhattisgarh, Through the ChiefSecretary, DKo Bhawm, Raipur. 2. State Transport Authority Raipur (CG). 3‘ State of Jharlghand, through ihe Chief Secretary, Ranchi. _ 4. State Transport Authority, Jharkhand at Ranchi. 7 5. Bihar State Road Transport Corporation, Patna Veerchand Pate! Path, Patna, Bihar.