?:n"r'? i" rsr;.;^'./ /i i <a;U3uLi: i'^p.iCff/^ ' /y r /- / -yy (2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. PETITIONER ^-y. J^y^ <^-// y -.'/^-' ^v.</\ '<2<p'>- 'sy RESPONDENTS >^» c. l.,,;.';:;^ ??" ^fsv ,-r <.^-'/.' ^ehunni Singh Markam S/o Shri Ganpat Singh Markam Age about40 years, AssistantTeacher, Govt. PrimarySchool, Kharharkuda, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) VERSUS 1.^ State Government of Chhattisgarh Through:- Secretary, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner TribalWelfare Department, Korba (C.G.) District Education Officer Korba(C.G.) Block Education Officer Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitioner most humbly submit as under:- 0^1 ^^.^k s^ 2. ^ -3. WW COURT OF CHHAmseMM AT BSLASPUk W. P. fS) No. 111 of 2007 Petitioners : Hemont Singh Kanwar ond ano-ttier Versus Respondents : Stute ©ovemmentof Chhattisgarh andolfiers w. p. ra No. 112 of 2007 Petitioner : Chunni Singh Markam Versus Respondents : Stnte Sovemment of Chhattisgurti wd olhers W. P. f»No. 114 <rf 2007 Petitioner ; Kdmol Singh Paikam Versus Respondents ; 5torte Sovemment of Chhorttisgarh ondo'thers W. P. fS No. 115 <rf 2007 Petitioner : Phulscy Paikara Versus Kespondents : Stnte Sovemment of Chhattisgorh ando-thers And W. P. f»No. 116 of 2007 Petitioner : Pmmod 5ingh Paikam Versus Respondents : Stnte Sovemment of Chhuttiqarh ondofhers SB: Honbte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agmhotri. J Shri Ayff 5hrivastava, Advocate for the petitioners. Smt. Anju Ahuja, bepirty Swemment Advocnte for Ihe respondents/State. @ OR 0 E R (Passed <»n16th Ay of Jamxuy, 2007) The follotwng order of the Court' is passed by Satish K. >(gnihotri, J. 1. Leomed counsel cppearing for Ihe petitioners as well ns teamed Deputy Sovemment Advoccrte cfyeoring for the respondents/State jomtly submit that the facts of the present case are similar to that of m W. P. (s) 6108 of Z0)6 (Rajkumari W/o M.1i. Dilliwur Vs. TTie Stnte 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh A others), which wus diiposed of vide order derted 8 November, 2006. They further subm'rt that •rfw question of Inw hwolved is also •the same. 2. In VWH of •the above stated submissions made by leamed counsel for •the parties, these writ petitions are disposed of m terms of the order dateef 8fh November, 2006 passed by ihis Cwrt 'm W. P. (s) 6108 of 2006. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be plwwd on record m other connected writ petitions. Bablu Sd/- SatishK.Agnaiotri Judge