t/' fvj ^l ^ Dlvlsion Bench c^ /'^T, !N THEHON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATISGARH AT BILASPUR. WP(S) N0. •2^-&^' OF 2010 PETITIONER: RESPONDENT: ^ .^\ ^ \.-^<s ^^ ...< y ^ .^•" >^ Amitansu Sekhar Jha, S/oShriB.L. Jha, Aged about 44 years, R/0 H.Npo.18/2, Vijay Ward No.2, Jagdalpur Jagdalpur Dist, C.G. State. . VERSUS 1)StateofC.G., Thru: Secretary, Higher Education Deptt,, DKS Bhawan, RAIPUR C.G. STATE. 2). Principal, Govt. Kaktiya PG College, Jagdalpur, Jagdalpur Diist, CG State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FORJSSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT (S) 1 ORDER IS} / DIRECTION fS). ETC. ^^i'!:IjSil^^?^;sI^^I^@^ii^ hN^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DB: Hon'ble Shri Justice I.M. Quddusi and Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar IVIishra Writ Petition (S.) No.2203 of 2010 Petitioner Dr. (Smt.) Kiran Nuruti Respondents Respondents Respondents Respondents versus State of C.G. and another Writ Petition (S.) No.2204 of 2010 Petitioner Archana Garhwal versus State of C.G. and another Writ Petition (S.l No.2205 of 2010 Petitioner Amitansu Sekhar Jha versus State of C.G. and another Writ Petition (S.) No.2206 of 2010 Petitioner Smt. Rekha Shukla versus State of C.G. and another Present: Shri K.R.Nair, counsel for the petitioner in all the four writ petitions. Shri Vinay Harit, Deputy Advocate General with Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents in all the four writ petitions. Writ Petitions under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India ORAL ORDER (Passedon 5th May, 2010) Per I.M. Quddusi. J.: Learned counsel appearing forthe parties are heard. 2. All the above four writ petitions are being disposedof by this common order as the facts and issues involved in all these petitions are one and the same. 3. The instant writ petitions have been filed with a prayer that similar order dated 1-4-2010, as has been passed in Writ Petition No. 1557/2006 and other similar writ petitions tied-up therewith, directing the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners taking into consideration the order dated 11-2-2010 passed by a Division Bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal No.1188/2009, may be passed. 4. Jn fact, Writ Petition No. 1557/2006 and other connected writ petitions were filed in 2006 and this Court directed the opposite parties to consider the cases of those petitioners, but learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State/respondents in the instant writ petitions has submitted that the instant writ petitions have been filed in 2010 itself and the petitioners were sleepirig and only just when they saw that this Court disposed of the aforesaid writ petitions filed in 2006, they approached this Court and it is settled law that the persons sleeping for a long time should not be granted any relief. 5. However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to adjudicate this matter at this stage but we are leaving the matter for disposal at the discretion of the State Government. The petitioners may approach the State Government by i ^ ^ moving a representation, which shall be considered and an appropriate dedsion in the discretion of the State Government shall be taken. It is also made clear that we have not considered the case of the petitioners on merits and also in view of the fact that they had not approached this Court earlier, they cannot be granted any benefit of the order dated 11-2-2010 passed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court or on that basis passed in Writ Petition No. 1557/2006 and other connected writ petitions. 6. All the four writ petitions stand disposed of. 7. A copy of this order be placed on the record of the three connected writ petitions, U'K^v C<;Uj?jOl tJJ:= Sd/- I.M. Quddusi Judge Sd/- prashantKumarMishra Judge ^ Gopal