c-^~ ^o-z^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT Bl LASPUR (C.G.) W.P.(C)No. 2-fc'Z^'/2011 PETITIONERS :1. <^ 3. .<?f^ C<~'£^p^' \^w ^y^ /'/./ <f 1>i~; 6. -^r: 9. 10. Chandra Kumar Dixena aged about 38 years, Son Of Shri Ramayana Dixena, Resident of Mahamaya Para Ratanpur, Tehsil Ratanpur, Dist. Bilaspur(C.G.) Premchand Khandey, aged about: 31 years, Son Of Shri Ratiram Khandey, Resident of Village:- Pendari, TehsilS District: Bilaspur (C.G.) Navneet Kumar Jaiswal, aged about: 34 Years, Son of Shri Ghanshyam Prasad Jaiswal, Resident of Jabbal Gali Near Rajput Provision Stroe Nehru Nagar, BilaspurTehsil & District: Bilaspur, (C.G.) Raju Ayangar, Aged aboiiit 36 Years, Son of Shri Sadanlal Ayangar, Resident of Village: Newsa, Tehsit Kota, District: Bilaspur, (C.G.) Ashwani Kuymar Sharma, aged about, 35 Years; Son of Shri MQtilal Sharma, Resident of Kota Masjidpara, Tehsil Kota, District: Bilaspur,(e.G.) Rohit Kumar Kaushik, aged about: 31 Years, Son of Shri M.P, Kaushik, Residentof Village Anda, Tehsil Takhatpur, Dist, Bilaspur(C.G.) Santosh Kumar Yadav, aged abQut:39 Years, Son of Shri Ghasiram Yadav, Resident of Village: Hardikala.Tehsil: Belha, District : Bilaspur, (C.G.) Ashok Kumar Dixena, aged about 37 Years, Son of Shri Panchram Dixena.Resident of Village Saila: Tehsil Pali, District Korba.(C.G.) Surya Prakash Jaiswal, aged about 28 Years, Son of Shri Radheshyam Jaiswal, Resident of Village: Nawagaon (Mohda), Tehsil Kota, District: Bilaspur (C.G.) Kaushaldas Manikpuri, aged about: 31 Years, Son of Shri Sampat Das Manikpuri, Resident of Village ModHe , Post Belmari, District: Bilaspur( C.G.) 11 ,,J 12. 13. 14. 15. RESPONDENTS: 1. Rajkumar Jaiswal, aged about 31 Years, Son of Shri K.L. Jaiswal, Resident of Village: Shish (Pali), Post: Shish (Pali), Tehsil & Disrtict: Bilaspur (C.G.) Girdharial Kaushik, aged about: 38 Years, Son of Shri Johanlal Kaushik, Resident of Village Dewtara Post: Bija, Tehsll : takhatpur, Distrct: Bilaspur (C.G.) Raghoram Kashyap, aged about: 36 Years, Son of Shri Bhagwat Prasad Kashyap, Resident Of Village: Batha, Tehsil Lormi, District: Bilaspur (C.G.) Ramesh Kumar Dubey, aged about: 32 Years.Son of Shri Shiv Kumar Dubey, Resident Of Village: Saida, Tehsil & District: Bilaspur,(C.G.) Santosh Kumar Banjare, aged about 33 years, Son of Shri Manuram Banjare, resident of Vjltage: Podi, Tehsil: Belha, District: Bilaspur(C.G.) VERSUS State of Ghhattisgarh, Through: Seeretary, Department Of Heatth &Medical Services, D.KS. Bhawan Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur(C.G.) The Director, Department of Health & Medical Services, Govt. Of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, Tehsil & Distriet Raipur(C.G.) The Registrar, ParaMedical Council, Office ofthe Para Medical Gouncil, Raipur.Tehsil & District Raipur(C.G.) The Secretary, Board Of Community Midwifery/ Para Medical Training Course, Raipur, Tehsil & District Raipur(C.G.) Chief Medical & Health Officer, Office of the Chief Medjcal & Health Officer Bilaspur, Tehsil & District Bilaspur, (C.G.) The Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue), office of sub divisional officer Kota, Tehsil : Kota, District Bilaspur (C.G.) HF WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2261 227 OF THE CONSTITUTIONOFINDIAFORISSUANCEOI:RROPERWRITIN THE NATURE OF CERtlORARI. MANDAMUS AND QUE- WARRANTO °-) HIGH COURT OF GHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETmONER WRFT PETITION (C-) No. 2625 of2011 Chandra Kumar Dixena & Others. RESPONDENTS VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Ofhers. WRTT PETmON L'NDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTFTUnON OF INDIA / SB: Hon'Me Shri Satish K. Asnihotri, J. Present: Sliri Rupesh Shi'ivastava, Advocate for the petitionefs. Shri V.V.S.Moorthy, Deputy Advocate General forthe State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed. on 13ttl day ofMay, 2011) 1. Bythis petition, the petitioners'seek a directiontothe respondents to pemiit and allow fhe petitioners to practice as Para Medical Worker, and fiirther, seek quashing ofthe notice dated 11.08.2010 (Annexure P/7) issued by therespondentNo. 6. 2. Leamed counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits tliat fhe condition fo allow the petitioners to practice as Para Medieal Worker is provided in the syllabus. 3. On query, asto whefher the petitioners have made any representation to the respondent authorities, seeking permission to allow fhe petitioners to practice as Para Medical Worker, leamed counsel is not in a position to respond the same. Leamed counsel is fartlier not in a position to state asto whether, the notice dated 11.08.2010 (Annexure P/7) has been responded to by the petitioners, and tliereafter, any order has been passed fliereoii. 4. The relevant materials, as aforestated, are not available in the petition, and for want of neeessar>' pleadings aiid materials, no , adjudication is possible. The petitidn appears to be vague and sketchy. 5. Thus, for want ofrelevant material, no relief as sought for by tlie petitioners, caa be granted. Accordingly, the. writ petition is \- dismissed. ''~ Amit Sd/- Satish K. Judge .•inlS^fW.-KS^,- •^^-^