IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(PIL) No. 4968 of 2017 Arvinder Singh Deol @ A. .S Deo,l Ward Councillor (Ward No 3) S/o Sri Harbansh Singh Deol, Villa Morhabadi, Dist Ranchi. ... ... ... ... ... ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Jharkhand through its Chief Secretary, State of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO and PS Dhurwa, Ranchi. 2. The Chief Secretary, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 3. The Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department Project Building, Project Building, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 4. The Director, Municipal Administration-Cum-Addl Secretary, Urban Development, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 5. The Municipal Commissioner, Ranchi Municipal Corporation, Ranchi, PO-GPO, PS-Kotwali Dist-Ranchi. 6. The Managing Director, Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Ltd., (JUIDCO), PO-Hinoo, PS Doranda, Dist- Ranchi. 7. Arun Kumar Singh, The Principal Secretary, The Urban Development Department, Project Bhawan, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 8. Chandeshwar Prasad Singh, The Hon’ble Minister, The Urban Development Department, Project Building, PO and PS Dhurwa, District Ranchi. 9. Ms Jyoti Buildtech Ltd, The Contractor Executing Sewerage, Drainage, The Ranchi Municipal Corporation Kutchary, PO-GPO, PS- Kotwali Dist Ranchi. 10. Union of India, through Secretary, Urban Development Department, New Delhi. 11. National Highway Authority of India, The Ministry Of Road Transport And Highway Government of India, New Delhi. 12. The Director (Personnel), the Heavy Engineering Corporation, PO and PS Dhurwa, Ranchi. … … ... Respondents --------- CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN --------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Mrinal Kanti Roy, GA-I Mr. Chandan Tiwari, AC to GA-I For the RMC: Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Advocate Mr. Yash Raj Gupta, Advocate For the NHAI: Mrs. Sweety Topno, Advocate Mr. Amrit Raj Kishku, Adocate -2- --------- 37/Dated: 17.03.2025 1) Counsel for the petitioner states that the respondents have taken steps for providing sewerage lines and setting up sewerage treatment plant and that no further order is necessary in this case. 2) In view of the said submission, this writ petition (public interest litigation) is closed. (M.S. Ramachandra Rao, C.J.) (Deepak Roshan, J.) Sharda/MM/ Cp.02