"V ^ z. IN THE HIGH CQ.URT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (CHHAmSGARB) WRIT P^BTION Ncy^- i?o? ( / 2004. PETITIONERS :- S.B Loknath @ Laxmi Narayan Sahu. TJ?'l OtF l^e^oO S/0 Late Shri Sharda Prasad Sahu, Aged about:-50 Yrs. By Occupation-Advocate, R/0:- Ward No-11, Mahatma Gandhi Ward, Tehsil/Distt.-Mahasamund, (C.G.) RESPONDE: :VERSUS: iyf^.y /l'. SabhaPati Sthayi Samittil, ^..'f (;..• ..• Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund. •J'h^^^ ^y.p^ y^' ^ Distt.:- Mahasamund,(C.G.) ^2. President, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund, Distt. Mahasamund [C.G.j /3. Chief Municipal OfHcer, Nagar Palika Parishad, Mahasamund, Distt.:- Mahasamund,(C.G.) /4. SUNDER RAM SAHU, S/0 Late Masuriyadin Sahu, R/0 Word No.:-l 1, Mabasamund, Distt.:-Mahasamund [C.G.j 5. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH. Through The SanchalakrplftjEc-n;^ ~] > Sanchanalaya Nagri Niyajan Evam Vikas. R.D.A. Bhavan, Raipur, [C.G.] WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 /227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE DIRECTION (S|, or ORDERfSI ^\.^> ^' y ^.^ ^^ ^~^~ ^^ Jl^'"'' ,,^f^ ^s^ y p"[;.,,-^i'' ^ ^^ 1 W&—^ . ' !!'M/'K^:^ ' i r^h....":' ""~ ^-^ 1 (a). Smt. Sandhyararri Sahu, W/o Late Loknath Laxminarayna Sahu, Age- 48 years. <p l(b). Ku. Labhanshi Sahu, D/o Lafe Loknath Laxminarayna Sahu, Age- 22 years. 1 (c). Lonit Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Loknath Laxminarayna Sahu,Age- 21 Years. l(d). Ku. Lalsa Sahu; D/o Late Loknath Laxminarayna Sahu, Age- 18 Years. 1 (e). Ku. Lokshakti Sahu, D/q Late Loknath Laxminarayna Sahu, Age- 16 Years. iGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BII-ASPUR WRO- PETmON N0^ 5051 OF 2004 Petitioners Versus Resoondents Smt. Sandhyarani Sahu 8 Others SabhaPatl Sthayi Samittii Others WRIT PETITSON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTiTUTION OF INDIA ^> (SB : Hon'bte Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present:- None for the petitioners. Shri Sudeep Agrawai, Advocate for the respondent No.1to3. Shri Shashank Thakur, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 6th day of September, 2010) 1. The matter is called for hearing twice. None appears nor is any representation made on behatf of the petitioners. The petitioners may not be interested in pursuing the matter. 2. In view of the above, the matter is dismissed for want of prosecytion. Sd/- Satish K.,Agnihotri Judge Gowri