"o Ha /t"^-. IN TBE HIGH COORT OF JtJDIC&TOBE AT BZIASPOR <C.S.) WRIT PETIIION N0.^33 /2005 PETITXONER ^ Rajeshwar Rao Kridat, S/o. Shri Shivghankar Rao Kridat, Aged about 40 years, ^f Occupation - service, ^.•"'^8 ' Presently working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Purv Madhyami k Schoo?, Jhalmala, Block Development Balod, District Durg (C.G-). R/o. Near Devarchana, Rajnandgaon Marg, Balod, \ District Durg (C.G.) \6W. ^.^^ .^yjyc^ \/:^<^ c.-Ti yf\.---yy .••" .c?' ^^ ^ KESPONDENTS ^. '^ <? VERSUS /'' 1 4 ,- 7 State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Director, Lok Shikshan, Rai-pur (C.G.) Dy. Director, Lok Shikshan, Durg Division, Durg(C.G.) District Education Officer, Durg (C.G.) Head Master, Govt. Purv Madhyamik School, Jhalmala, Block Development Balod, District Durg (C.G.) Smt. Sunita Deshmukh, Teacher, Pu-Ma-Shala Godpendry, Patan, Dist. Durg (C.G.) Rohit Kumar Chandrakar, Teacher, Pu-Ma-Shala Vijaytala, 0ist. Rajnandgaon (C.G) Ram Kumar Verma, Teacher, Pu-Ma-Shala Sirsakala Patan, Dist. Durg (C.G) 9. Ajay Chandrakar, Teacher, Pu-Ma-Shala Salo'ni, Dist. Rajnandgaon (C.G) WRIT PETITICai UNDER ARFICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITOTI(»1 OF INDIA FOR ISSIXaNCE OF WRXT XN THE N&TOBE OF CERTIORftRI, MaNDaMUS, HROHIBITION AND FOR OTHER SOITaBl-E WRIT OR WRITS, OBDER OR ORDEKS, DIBECTION OR DIRECTXONS ;a,;: ? :Si3,*.1 ,B!a,».«l.yiinuA]Uc. -^ ^ SiMGLE BENCH : KON'BL IIHOTRi, J. Petitloner uuuerii; M?8jT£ETmONN0.499_OF2001 Vsrsys Rajeshv/ar R&o Kridat State of Chhattisgarh and others Present iVlrs. Fouzia Mirza, counsel for the peti'aoner. Mr. Ajay DvB'ivedi, Panel Lawyer for respondenis No,1 to5. None appears for other respondents. QRDER fPassed o" 9tn of October, 2006) Learned counse! appearing for the petitionsr submits that the question of !aw involved in this petition is governed by the Circuiar dated 20-1-1987. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh in indraveer SSngh Tomar vs, State c-f M.P. and othars has considered the issue and disposed of the said matter in foliowing terms :- Oi in view of this submission advanced by Counsei for parties, thls petition is disposed of by glving fo'lowing directions. The respondent No.1 shali consider petitioner's repressntatioris referred to above and disposs of ths same at an eariy date, prsferably within a period of 3 rnonths from the date of communication of this ordsr in accordance with iaw, keeping'in mind.the circulars .."=> issued by State Govt. as also the dirsctions given by the Tribuna! in simliar matters." 2. Learned counsel appsaring for ths parties would jointly submlt and admit that thls case, being simiiar in nature, Is squareiy covered by the decision of the Madhya Pradesh nigh Court in the case of Indraveer Sing'n Tomar (Supra). > 3. In vsew of aforestated reasons, this petition is disposed of in the sameterms. Noorderasto Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge 2004(2) M.P.H.T. 3 (NOC)