3 BEFORE THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL BENCH RAIPUR O.A.NO. C^^f^^^ 12002 APPLICANT NON-APPLICANT Arun Shukla SonofShriR.K.Shukla Asstt. Teacher Govt. GirlsHigherSecondarySchool Chowki (C.G.) - VERSUS 1. State of Madhya Pradesh Through the Secretary DepartmentofAdim Jati Kalyan Vallabh Bhavan Bhopal(M.P.) 2. StateofChhattisgarh through the Secretary DepartmentofAdim Jati Kalyan Adivasi Vikas D.K.S. Bhavan Raipur(C.G.) 3. The Commissioner Adivasi Vikas Vibhag Govt. of Madhya Pradesh Satpuda Bhavan Bhopal(C.G.) 4. The Commissioner Adivasi Vikas Vibhag Govt. ofChhattisgarh D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur Chhattisgarh ORLGINAL APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 1 9 OF THE M.P. STATE ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNALACT, 1985 zr H1GH COURT OF GHHATTBGARH AT BBJkSPlNt SINGL.E BEhKIH : HOiN'BLE MR. SATISHK AeNIHOTFB. A WRTT PETITION (S.) N0^880 W2005 Petifener Resoondents versus Arun Shukla State af Madhya Pradesh (new ChhatU^arh) and ottiers Petitioner Respondents WRIT PETmON (S.l N0^883 OP 20W Vishnu Ram Sahu versus State of Madt^a Pmdesh (now ChhatU^iarh) and othere PaUiBonee WRIT PETITION (S.l N0^84 OF 2005 Ram Kumar Oiohan and ®Ui®re versus Respondents : StateofChhattisgarhandanothw Petttioners WRITPETmON(S.lN0.490«OFM86 T<^i Lal Patet aml others versus Respondents : State ofChtiatBsgiuti and anc^ier .^ -^ . WRIT PETITIONKS.) NQ4987 OF 26 PeStionera : SubhashGhaRdraGuptaandcAers versus Respondents : State of GhhatUsgarband aaother Petitioners WRIT PETmON (S.l N0.4888 OF Tite^i KumarGavel and (rthers veraus Respondents : Stete of Chhrttl^arti and othws Petitioners WRIT PETITIONfS.l N0^09 OF 3M)06 Ganesh Ram Patel and othere versus ResDondente : Stateof ChhatBsgarii andanethm' Petittonere VmiT PETmON (S.1 NO^UIO C»SM»6 DhaRnendraSinghBafeaKlottwrs versus Respondents : StateofChhatBsgarhandanother PeUtioner& WRITPETm<»l(S.lNOA811OF200S h4ahe^i Rarn Patel and ancttier vereus R^pondents : StErteof ChhdUsgarhandanoittier -<*» s'f ^ V; ^\ Petitiortere WRIT PETmCW .l N0^9120F 2MS Bairagi Prasad Gupta and sthe@ veisus Respondents : Steite<rfGhhaUsgart»andottiera PeUConers WRIT PETITIOM (S.) N04913 OF 2005 Bandii Dhar Patel and othe® vereus Respondenls : SterteofGhlwBisgarhandanather WRIT PETmONfS.l N0.8063 OF2006 Petitioners : Nand Kistore Vsfehnav smd ottiers Versus Respondents : Sterteof CNiaUsgarhand athws WRtT PETmON(S.lNO.«>640F2006 Petitionere : idhav MucariNayalcaml ^iers versus Respondents : State ofChhartUsgwh and anottier Petitioners Respondents VWIT PEwnoN <s.) No^eesw ssws Sa»rtRam Sao and othere vsrsys State ofGhhErtti^artt and ottwis 4 ^ -"> ^ WRIT PETmON (S.INQ^OTO OF2885N Petitioner : Smt. UjjmralaSaxena versus Respondents : StateofGhhatBsgahandothers Present : Mr. Maneesh Sharma, counsel for the petitonere. Mr. Anrind Dubey, Panet Lawyer forthe State/respondents. OWDBft (Pa^ed on 22nd DayefJanuary, 2607) Leamed counsel appeartng fer the parties jointty submtt ttat e facts and quesBon of law involved in the present bateh GfsOTtt petitions are squarely covered by the declston of thte Court in the case of Sushll Tiwart and athws vs. StateQovemmentaf Chheatt^a^ ancf others OWrit Petition (S.) No.5976 of 2006), datod 7-11-2006. 2. For the aforemenUoned reasens, the writ petittons are altowed in terms of the dacishan of ttiis Court tn the matter of Sa^rf/ Tlwari and oOiers vs. State Govemmmit af ChliatV^arit aml othere (Supra). No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be placed on the reeord of Ihe connected writ petMons. Sd/- K. .Agmhotri Judge ..—-^SuiaaL