Kym-m Cfz 7E5&/^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGASH AT BILASPUR W . P. (S) N0. 1 2-& S / 2007 <-& & Petitioner ^y/ ^:^/ ^'.-' f,a5;''-. y ..-<tex^-"' ^ \-' ••" >;'"'0/'..-' ^^,' ^•^/ 'yy €' -^uranlal Dewangan S/o Shri Parasram Dewangan, Aged about 41 years, Assistant Teacher, r Govt. Higher Secondaiy School, Supela Bhilai, Dist : Durg-(C.G.) Versus Respondents : i)T^ State of Chhattisgarh Through-The Secretary School Education Departinent, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur-(C.G.) Directorate of Public Instruction, Raipur-(C.G.) District Education Officer, Durg-(C.G-) WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICE 226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^ ^•°'"' n) Ul 1./ Partieulars-nf-tLi*^-**- •^- 2. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTSSGARH AT BSLASPUR W.P.(S)No. 1285 of 2007 Petitlon Puranla! Dewangan Versus Respondente S^te of Chhattisgarh & othsrs S8: Hon'bte Nir. Justics Satish K. Agnihotri, j Shri S. K. Thomas, Advocate for Uie patitioner. Shri Safeh Gupta, Deputy Govt. Advocate forthe respondernts. ORDER (Passed on this 2ml day of March, 2007) The fofiovinng order ef the Court is passed by SaSish K. Agnihofrj, J. 1. Leamed couRse.' appearing for the petiSoner submite that the question of !a'vV invoived in this petiSlon is governed by ttie circular dated 20.1.1987. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, indore Bench, in the Indravser Singh Toniar Vs. Stats of M.P. and ottsers ^a^^gjt ^^f In^l i/ei^S vi »j t. In { 2004 (2) M.P.H.T. 3 (NOC)}, has considsred the issue and disposed of thesaid matter in the following terms:- "2..........!n view ofttii's submission advanced by Counsel for partiss, this peStion is dsspossd of by giving foilov/iRg directions. The respondsnt No.1 shali consider petitioner's representations referred te above and disposs of the same a{ an ear!y date, preferab!y v/ithin a period of 3 months from the date of communteation of this order in accordance wth tew, keeping jn mirsd the circuiars issued by StaSe Govt. as also the directions given by $he Tribuna! in simter matters." I .SS-'IFIi^^^in) ^t^B^ t»^<?.iHkl ^t»^»»iF'i--ty??<^<»fr^f f'h^ in'^y+*AC r^A! )I^I 1/t'nt!*.? ^ttl 'tiW ^VUliS%?i Ci^y^RlHiy iVi U i%? ^cilU^'a VifVUiU jvifiuy sui^lDU oi admit that Shis case, being similar in nafrdre, is squareiy co'v'ered by the decisson in the case of Indraveer Ssngh Tomar (supra). view of the afcrestated reasons, Shis petition is disposed of with !iberty to the petitioner to make a representation along with a copy of the order passed in the case of Indraveer Singh Tomar (supra), v/hich may be considered and decided, in accordance wiSh law. Vi'ithin a period of six v/eeks from She date of receipt of the represenSation. No order as to cosSs. Thakur Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge