r ^- ('or> IN THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S)~NO.f-^ 2-k /2006 WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA, PETITIONER -^..-••''^f' ,^s> ^^g^ •A'':''^,..-'' '^'"''^s1- 'y"' ^y^^" ^y ^* RESPONDENTS 1. 2. ^-Ramkumar Banjare, aged about 38 years, son of Shri Ramayan Prasad Banjare, Assistant Teacher, Govenunent Tribal Primary School, Dumardeeh, Vikas Khand Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.)(Sl.No. 27 ofAmie P-1) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Distt. Korba (C.G.) PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER As per cause title. HI6H COURT OF CmWTTISSMM AT BILASPUR W.P. fsyNo. 7BOO<rf2006 Retitjohw : Panch Ram Navrong Versus Respondents : Stirtie of Chhattisgarh ond orarther W. P. fal No. 7S01 af 2006 Retitioner ; Jugal Ram Chaknssh Verais Respondents : Statc of Chhattisgarh ond another W.P. te No. 7B02 <rf 2006 Petitwner ; Jagdish Chandra yodnw Versus Respondents : State of Chhorttisoarh ond oiw-ther W. P. (s)No. 7B03<rf200& Petitioner : Dici Sai Raikra Vwsus Re^wndents : State of Chhatt'isgarh ond orwther W. P. fal No. 7!S04 uf 2006 Petitioner : Nandtedhwor Ram Bhoigat Versus Respondents ; Storte of Chhffttisaorh ond anolher W. P. (sl No 750B <rf 2006 Petitioner : Scimehl Khunte Versus Respondents : Stcrhe of Chhattiwrh ond ano'ther W. P. (s) No. TS af 2006 Petitiwier : Smt. Philwnina Khdo Versus Respwidents : Stoite of Chhattisgnrh ond orwther W. P. fal No. re09 <rf 2006 Petitioner ; Shyam 5under yadov Respwidents veri?us SM»of Oihattwaarh and onolhcr ^. ^ W. P. (s) No. 7510 of 2006 Petitioner : HikmyusKujur Versus Respondents : Storteof Chhattisgarh ond o-thers W. P. ts) Nn 7B11 af 2006 PetHioner : Ku. Rajkumori Dohdriya Versus Respondents ; Stnte of Chhattisgarh and o'thers W. P. falNa. 7B12<rf2006 Petitioner : Rang Valfabh Sidar Verais Respondents : State of Chhnttisonrh ond ano-ther W. P. ts) NB. 7B13 rf 2006 Retitwner : Rnmdutar Keahtor Versus Respondents : State of Chh<rttteourh ond olhert W. P. (ri Nn. 7S14 af 2006 Petitwner : Prndyumn Kumar Versus Respondents : State of ChhattiSBnrh cnd OI*NM-S W. P. falNo. TOlB<rf200& Petitioner : Smt. Luldshhm MinJ Versus ftespondents : Shrta of Chhattisgurh and cnolher W. P. fal No. 7S16 <rf 2006 Petitioner : Tinwthiyus Toppo Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisaarh and o-thers W. P. (riNu 7B17irf200& Petitioner : AmritKumar Versus : StateofChlwrt+iAMrhando-thers ResDondents r^. ~- 'i.' W. P. fal Nn 7S18 <rf 200& Petitioner :. DulBn-Ekkn Versus Respondents : Stnte of Chhnttisoarh ond olhers W. P. (s) Na 7S19 <rf 200& PetMwner : Alfrad Kujur Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisoart and onolher W. P. fal N" 7S?1 -rf rnnA Petitioner : Probhu Sai Tirky Versus Respondents : Stnte of Chhatti^arh and olhers W. P. fal Nn. 7S22 <rf 200& Petitioner : Jagannath Rnm Veraus (tespondents : Storte of ChhotMs(wrh ond others W. P. falNo 7B23<rf2006 Patitioner : Mnhiar Sai Raikra Versus Respondents : State ofChhotMsgarh and others W. P. CriNu. 7B24<rf2006 Petrh'oner : Smt. RebekaMhj Versus Reapondaits : State of Chhattisgarh <md oltiers w. P. fs) NB. Tsa af 2006 Petitioner : AjitKumar Tirky Versus Kespondents : StnteofChhattiaanrhondtnother And W P fd N« 7B26<rf 2006 Ptetitioner : Rnmkumtu-Banjare RuBondents versus SluteofChhattJsdnrhtndmlher 4. .^9 SB: Hon1>le Mr. Justfce Satish K. Agnlhotri. J Mr. A.N. Bhaktn, Advocate fer the petitioners. Mrs. Mfi Ahuja, Depirty fiovemment Advocote for the rMpondenl'a/State. OR&ER CPasaed <m 9<h doy of January. 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appeoring for •the peti'tioners as wiell as leamed Deputy fiovemment Advocarte oppenrhg for the reapondenta/Stnte jomtty submit -thut Ihe facts of Ihe present co«are rimilar to thut of in W. P. (s) 5976 of 2006 (Sushil Tiwnri A olhers Vs. SKrte Sovt. of Chhatt-i^wh & o'thers), which was allowed vide order dated 7tl1 November, 2006. They further submit •that the question of ln«» involved is also 'tfie snme. 2. Ih view of 1he ofcove stated submissions made by leamcd counsel for •the parties, -theSB writ petitions are utlow»d in tBrms of Ihe ordw dated 7*1' November, 2006 passed by -th'is Court in W. P. (s) 5976 of 2006. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of -this order be ptaced on record h o-ther connected writ petitions. Subhash SA'- SatishK.Agai! Judge