^ ^ <t ow. ^A;^-' ')'c^r>::''.^v'v~""...--". 'r^k^--""? .•-. ^^.•••••" •w^ i? / - / ero IN THE mpH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION CS) N0. /SP IIQWrOj WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS L .-„ t"* lfEC^^V ^^n;M"" Smt. Prasadi Bhagat, aged about 41 years, wife of Shri Subodh Bhagat, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Girls Primary School Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (CG) VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 01. PARTICULARS ABQUT_TIffi PETmQNER HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.fSl No. 117 of 2007 Petitioners : Atonsingh Khande and others Versus Respondents : State of Oihattisgarh and o-thers W. P.(S) No. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejram Bhagat ond others Versus Respondents : State of ChhattiS9arh and others W. P.fS) No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner ; Sanjay KuBnar Snha Versus Reqiondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner : Bhuvneshwar Prosad Pracyian Verais Respondents : Stute of Chhattisgarh ond others W. P.(S) No. 127 of 2007 Petitioner : Kulrcnjan Ekka Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : 5mt. Bharti Bai Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P.(S\ No. 129 of 2007 Petitioner ; Philos Akshdy AAukut Tigga Versus Re^iondents : State of Chhattis9arh ond ano-ther W. P.fSl No. 130 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Prusadi Bhdgat Versus Reqiondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another ^ W. P.fS) No. 131 of 2007 Petitioner : Sogar Sai Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-is9arh and olhers W. P.(S) No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Inus Bek Versus Respondents ; State of Chhatl-isgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 134 of 2007 Petitioner ; Balinun Bho9at Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt'isgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner : Avinash Chondra XaJco Versus Respondents : Stort-e of Chhatt'isgarh ond others W. P.fSl No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Shadiikata Bhogat Versus Respondents : Stale of ChhattTS9arh and another W. P.(S\ No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduram Bhagat Versus Respondents : State of Chhatfi^rh ond ano-ther W. P.fS) No. 139 of 2007 Petitioner : Ku. Clementina Tig9a Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 145 of 2007 Petitioner - : Krishna Ram Patel Versus Respondents : State of <3ihattisgarh and others "\ (B W. P.fS)Nk>. 147 of 2007 Petitioner : Laxminanycn Patet Versus Respondents : State of 0»hattis9arhand another W. P.(S) No. 149 of 2007 Petitk»ner : Smt. Maxi Miliyani Toppo Versus Re^>ondents ; State of Chhattisgarh ond ono-ther W. P.fS) No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner ; Smt. Rajmani Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner : Oiamru Ram Nagdeo Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond others W. P.(S) No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Sonesh teun Pradhan Versus Respondents : Storte of Chhattisgarh and ano-ther W. P.(S) No. 161 of Z007 Petitioner : Chhotelal Khanna Versus Respondents : State of Chhanisgarh and ano-ther W. P./S) No. i65 of 2007 Petitioner : Ramkumar Choudhari Versus Re^iondents : State of Chhattisgarh and onother And W P.(S\ No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner ; Brijmohan Nayak Versus Respondents : Stute of Chhtrttisgarh ond ono-ther SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Ayiihotri, J Present: Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mrs. AnJ^i Ahuju, Deputy fiovemment Advoicate, Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel Lowyer, Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer fo(' 1+ie respondents/State. OR D E R 0>flcsed on -(his 17th Day of Jonuary, 2007) 1. Leaumed counset appearing for the petitioners as well as for the State/respondents joffttly submit -rtiat the facts of the present writ petitions wv. similur to -that of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari ond others vs. State Sovemment of ChhattiSQorh & o'thers), ii»hich t»asallowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit that the question of ku»involved is also the same. Subhash 2. In view of the above-stated submissions made by leamed counsel for the parties, •these *wit petitions asre allowed in terms of Ihe order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in W.P. (5.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State Sovemment of Chhatti^arh & o-thers). No order as to costs. 3. A copy of •this order be placed on record m other connected writ petition. sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge