IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONERS: ^-.:.s-i:-..^i,^—.^^ WRIT PETITION N0. ..^0.2:7../2004 1] 2] RESPONDENTS: 1] 2] Leela Bai D/o. Sbri Itwari, Age 54 years, R/o. Village Nawagaon, Post Patewa, Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) Bisahin, D/o.Tirith Ram, Age 58 years, R/o. , Village Nawagaon, PSst Patewa, o. , vmage INawagaon, f&st t^atewa, Distt. Mahasaiiiund (C.G.) <"^5->^'2CT$'ay 0^e-s' ..., >Aa.•••••""'_. ; '—yi-"'" ..„••"• VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Public Works Deptt., Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan-Raipur (C.G.) Executive Engineer, National Highway Division, P.W.D. Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 01] Particulars of the petitioner :As stated in the cause titie. HI6H COURT OF CHH/tTTISSARH AT BIUtSPUR W. P. No. 3147 of 2004 Petitioner : Suclhrom Versus Raspondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P. No. 3188 of 2004 Petitioner : Mohit Raro Versus Respondents ; State of Chhatt-isgarfi ond oinother W. P. No. 3279 of 2004 Petitioner : Durdeshi Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt'isgar+i and another W. P. No. 4929 of 2004 Petitioners : Shobha Ram cnd others Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarii and ano-tfier W. P. No. 4830 of 2004 Petitioner ; Johan Bijhwar Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P. No. 5027 of 2004 Petitioners : LeelaBai ond another Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarii ond onother W. P. No. 1103 of 2005 Petitioners ; Bajrdia gam ond othars Versus Responcfents : State of Chhattisgarh cmd others And W. P. fsl No. 614 of 2007 Petitioners : Ju'thel Yactav and olhers Versus Respondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh and another y-' SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agmhotri. J Mr. Ashok Vaishnav, counsel for Ihe petitioners. Mr. Arv'md Dubey, Panel Lawyer for •the respondents/State. OROER (Passtsd on l*t day of FebnKxry, 2007) The following order of the Court- is possed by Satish K. ^gnthotri. J. 1. Leomed counsel oppearing for the petitioners as wetl as teamed Penel lawyer appearing for •the respondents/Stcrte jointly submit •that the foct's of the present case are simitar to that of in W. P. No. 454/2005 / (Ram Prasad Yactav & others vs. Sta-te of Chhnttisgarh & others), which was ollowed vide order dnted 4.1.2007. They furl+ier submit that the question of kw»involved is also the same. 2. In view of •the above stated submisa'ons inade by leamed counsel for the part-ies, these writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order ckxted 4.1.2007 passed by this Court m W. P.No. 454/2005. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be plcued on record in connected writ petitions. Sd/- . SarishK. Bablu Judge