g $lN§LE QE%§Q§~E Q) IN’THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P.(C.) No. ‘3H? /201o / PETITIONE Ghanshyam Raipuriha S/o Arjun Singh, Aged about 28 years, Occupation Kotwar, Navagaon, Tahsil 8L District Village ‘ Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. / State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Department of Revenue, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (r/ 1(C.G.) 2. The Collector Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C.G.) 3. The Sub Divisional Officer, .- Revenue, Dhamtari District Dhamtari (C.G.) 4. K The Nayab Tahsiidar, Dhamtari, District Dhamtari (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY OR ANY OTHER WRIT OF LIKE NATURE ETC. R: “ ' 2b HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 3 1 17 0f2010 PETITIONER : Ghanshyam Raipuriha. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 01“ day of July, 2010) however, the p’ctitioner may be permifted to make a represcntation and the respondents may be directed to consider and decide the case of the petitioner in the h'ght of order dated 04.05.2010 passed in W.P.(C) No. 2135 of 2010 (Ude Ram v. State ofChhattz'sgarh & Others). 10. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the Amit I in the light of the order passed by this Court in Ua’e Ram (supra), within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 11. In View of the above, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives for adiudication. 12. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. \ K Sd/— l ] Satish Judge K. Agnihotri war