1 Fired by Shri today_ \1 Wig g;§ For «’isfrar, M . M, P, Stan; , #m. Tiibunal. IN THE MADHYA PRADESH ADMINISTRATI‘ gE TRIBUNEI‘f'UR- n ‘BENCH AT RAIPUR CHHATTISGARH. wm) 3&1“) > ,‘. 0.A. I OF 2001. APPLICANTS :- 1. Rajesh Kumar Soni, Son ofLate Shankar Lal Soni aged 36 years working as Upper division teacher at Govt. Middle School, Ghanram, Sankul Kargikala District Bilaspur resident of Kargiroad, Kota District Bilaspur. 2. Smt. Manju Thakur, wife of Narendra Singh Thakur aged 33 years working as Upper division teacher at Middle School Munmuna Sankul Kendra Pandaria District KaWardha, resident ofBairag para, District Kawardha. Amar Lal Sahu Son of Dukhu Ram Sahu, aged 38 years, working as Upper division teacher Govt. Middle School Devsara, Pandaria, District Kawardha, resident of Sahaspur post Khapri kala via. Pandaria, District Kawardha VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.Bhawan, Raipur. Chhattis'garh. The Director, Public Instructions School Education, Government ofChhattisgarh, Jail Road,Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ' ,‘ 3. Assistant Commissioner, Adivasi Vikas, Government of Chhattisgarh Bilaspur ‘ District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, s i . .. , %\}q_g3>u// RESPONDENTS :- g 3: W '5. District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, "Rawausdka Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. DETAILS OF APPLICATION H. 3 - W 2v W 55 : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan S‘hrivastava, J. 19-33—2010 Shri MCD. Dhote, counsel forthe petitioners. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents. Heard. The petitioners have filed this petition ciaiming the simiiar benefrts as have been given to Asst. Teachers appointed in between the year 1983-1984 who had approached the Tribunai by niing Ori 'nai Application No.2745/1989 (decided on 24.81992), wherein Tribunai directed enefits to be given to aii teachers, it is aise stated that the State chaiienged the sa d order before the Supreme Court in S.L.P. No.6892/1993 which was dismissed vi e order dated 3‘1 .1994. in number of cases, this respondents to consider the cases. Accordingly, this petition is also disposed of with liberty t0 the petitioners to make representation! if so advised, to consider their cases on its own merits and perspective. If the petitioners stand on the ame footings as per order passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal in OA No.2745/89 (Madhakant Yas‘u and 5e ozhers Vs. State af d others) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Civi No.6892l93 by order dated 3 1.1994, appropriate order would be passed by e respondents authority. ourt has passed orders directing the Turnane i M l