w \w/w 3WGLE 3ER€H D 3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONERS w. P. (S) No. \Dqu OF 2011 :— 1 . / , Nar Singh Banjare S/o Baratu Ram Banjare, Aged about 45 years, presently working as Lineman. Akhileshwar Aditya S/o Shri Jagatram, Aged about 39 years, Presently working as Pump Operator. Manoj Sahu S/o Krishna Dayal Sahu, aged about 33 years, working as Sanitary Supervisor. Ramcharan Barbhav Hukumchand Barbhav, about 38 years, Gardner. Sharad Kumar Dewangan S/o Shri Patiram Dewangan, Aged about 38 years, working as Assistant Revenue Inspector. Amjad Khan S/o Rajab Khan, Aged about 3O years, working as Tractor Driver. Liloj Kumar Verma, S/o Senjeet Verma, Aged about 28 years, working as Computer Operator. Ishwar Prasad Sahu S/o Bitthal Sahu, Aged about 34 years, working as Watchman (Water tank) Akshay, Kumar Jatwar S/o Dhaniram Jatwar, Aged about 32 years, working Assistant Revenue Inspector, Ku. Vimla Singh Rajput, D/o Mani Singh, Aged about 26 years, working as Assistant Revenue Inspector. All are Daily wages employees, working in the Nagar Panchayat Bhatgaon, District Raipur (C.G.). S / o Aged working as L23 RESPONDENTS :— 1. / VERSUS The State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The Under Secretary, Department of Urban Administration and Development, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The Nagar Panchayat Bhatgaon, Through Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchay'at, Bhatgaon, District Raipur (C. G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR ‘ WRIT PETITION (S) NO.1074 OF 2011 Nar Singh Banjare & Others PETITIONERS Versus RESPONDENT The State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present :- Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Adv. General for the State. ORDER tORAL! (Passed on this 24‘ day of February, 201 1) 1. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the parties jointly and fairly submit that the issue involved in the present petition as well as in Dhan/ram & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others’, which was considered and decided by this Court on 20.01.2011, are identical. Thereafter, the said issue was re-considered in Virendra Das Manikpuri & Others v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Othersz, by this‘Court on 10.02.2011. Thus, the instant petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this court in Dhaniram & Others’ and Virendra Das Manikpuri 8. Others? ln view of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, this petition is disposed of in terms of the orders passed in Dhaniram & Others7 and Virendra Das Manikpur/ & Others? I Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotrl Judge Gowri “m 1 W.P.(S) No. 6798 of 2010, decided on 20.1.2011 2 W.P.(S) No. 7450 of 2010 , decided on 10.2.2011