C^-1-0-0 IN THE fflGH CQURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITION(S)NO. l^$~ /20Q&^L WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PETITIONER ,<Krishna Ram Patel, aged about 38 A^ years, son of Shri Anganu Ram, (A.V- /\)-y- ( ..•••' Assistant Teacher. Govemment Tribal \vy.J\/^\r r- ^..^.^' ^-- ^®-- "'^ i^ESPONDENTS o <?^, >'^ Av^ ^^y ($P^ .^y'. Assistant Teacher, Govemment Tribal Primary School Bhudkela, Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State ofChhattisgarh,through- Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) "2. The District Education Officer, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Deptt of Tribal Welfare Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 01. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER --»3 HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.fS^No 117 of 2007 Petitioners : AAansin^iKhande and others Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejram Bhagatand others Versus ftespondents : Stdte of Chhdrttisgurh and others W. P.(S\ No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanjay Kumar SNiha Versus Re^ondents : S-tate of Chhatfrisgarh and ono-ther W. P.fS) No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner : Bhuvneshwer Prasad Pradhan Versus Reqwndents : State of Chhaf-isgarh ando-thers W. P.(S\ No. 127 of 2007 Petitioner : Kulranjan Ekka Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and o-thers W. P.fS) No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Bharti Bai Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ano'ther W. P.(S\ No. 129 of 2007 Petitioner : Philos Akahoy AAukut Tigga Versus Re^ondents : State of Chhatt-iS9arh and onolher W. P.fS) No. 130 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Prasadi Bhagat Versus Re^>ondents : State of ChhatHsgarh and another W. P.fSl No. 131 of 2007 Petitioner : Sogar Sai Versus Respondents : State of ChhdrttiS9arh ond o-thers W. P.(S) No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Ihus Bek Versus Respondents ; Slute of Chhattisgarh ond ano-ther W. P.fSl Nto. 134 of 2007 Petitioner : Baliram Bho9at Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ono-thep W. P.(S) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner : Avmash Chandra Xalco Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgou4i and o-t+iers W. P.(S\ No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Shashikafa Bhogat Versus Reqiondents : 5tate of ChhattiS9arh ond another W. P.(S\ No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduroun Bha9at Versus Respondents : Stnte of Chhatt-isgai4i ond ano-ther W. P.fS) No. 139 of 2007 Petitioner : Ku. Clementina Tigga Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and ano-ther W. P(S) No. 145 of 2007 Petitioner ; Krishna Ram Patel Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarii ond others W. P.fS)No. 147 of 2007 Petitwner ; Laxminanyon Patel Versus Respondents ; S'tate of Chhatt'i^arh and onother W. P.fS) No. 149 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Maxi Miliyoni Toppo Versus Respondents : State of Chhutt'isgurh ond ono-ther W. P./S^ No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Rajmani Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh end o-thers W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner : Chamru Ram Nagdeo Versus ftespondents : State of Chhatti^arh ond others W. P.fSl No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanesh Ram Prodhon Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ano-ther W. P.(S) No. 161 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhotelal Khanna Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-is9arh and another W. P.fS) hk>. 1 of 2007 Petitioner : Ramkumflr Choudhari Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt'isgarh and another And W P.(S) No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner : Brijmohon Nayak Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond another SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Ayuhotri. J Presenr. Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mrs. Anju Ahu^i, Dqnity Sovemment Advocate, Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel Lcnvyer, Ms. Sunita Jain, Ponel Lawyer for the respondents/State. ORDER passed on this 17th Day of January, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel oppearing for •the petitioners cs well as for •the State/respondents jointly submit -tho* Ihe facts of the present wrrt petitions aro similar to -that of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State fioveminent of Chhatt'isgarh & others), which was allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit that the question of taw involved is also the same. 2. In view of the above-stated submissions made by leamed counset for the parties, these writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in WP. (5.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari ond others vs. State Sovemment of ChhattiS9arh & olhers). No order as to costs. SirtAaah 3. A copy of this order be placed on record 'm other connected writ petition. - — — Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge