^. y '<» IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G,) WRIT PETITIONNO.Sl<^ /2005 PETITIQNER ^^ ^€A '^"''.'s?^ .^'^^1 <^y^>''' '^^ RESPONDENTS ^, /^ Harilal Amlesh Son! of Shri /'-. : '^ ~ ^ ^ '^ ^~ ^i^ -;/1: ..•••"^^>""..« Hajarilal Amlesh, aged about 38 ^0'r-'1' -••'•*" years, Shiksha Karmi Grade-3, Primary School Beljheriya, Tahsil Marwahi, District Bitaspur (C.G.) VERSUS ^\. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: The, Secretary, Department of Schoor^dcatieft, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Raipur (C.G.). Bhawan 2. Janpad Panchayat Marwahi, Through: The Chief Executive Officer, Marwahi, District Bilnspiir -^-^T-^CO?^^ (C-G-)' S^F^^' ^.G.^^us scr'^^'''-'^ ~^^^ BEC" CLEt^ ^ The Additipnal CQllector, Pendid Road, District Bilaspar (C.G.). ^A. i The District Education |0fficer, Education District Bilaspur <C.G.). ^•5. The Zila Panchayat Bilaspur, Through: The Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat Bilaspiir (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTIQN OF INDIA, 1950 FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS ETC. AND FOR APPROPRIATE ORDER/ORDERS, DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS. N ,s^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Writ Pedtion No. 5451 of 2005 Petitioner Harilal Amlesh Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & others fWrit Petition under Ardcle 226/227 ofthe Constitution oflndia) (SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri J.) Shri P. P. Sahu, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N. N. Roy, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDE R (oralt ( Passed on this 9th day of March, 2010 ) 1. 2. 3. Heard. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that in view ofthe averments made by the respondents/State in para 6 ofthe return filed in W.P.No. 5414/2005 (Vinod Kumar Rai Vs. State of Chhattisgarh 8s others), the relief sought for in this writ petition has already been granted. Thus, nothing remains for adjudication. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State does not controvert the above submission made by leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. No order asto costs. „.. SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Thakur