c^f1- ®5nULi f? ^^tl^^ ^ ^^^A^1t f^ T ^.rt' 'fr; ^S^l: '" ^ roo IN •I'BB'HIGH G^SSS'seSs^UDICKesjSE^CSaK'E'EtSWSE: BIIASPUR WRIT PETITION NO(S) : S 3 <^ OF _200j?- PETITIONERS ^" 1. Shekhar Ram Verma aged 47 yrs. s/o'Shri Kisun Verma r/o New Vijay Nagar Avanti Vihar Raipur Distt: Raipur CG ^2. Dasharath Yadav aged 50 yrs s/o Shri Rambhao Yadav r/o Shitlapara, Ramnagar Bilaspur CG ^^ ^w^ oV< es-^ ':.-'• y ff 4. ^' Dasharath Lal Sahu aged 38 yrs s/o Shri Makhanlal Sahu Gram-Chinwari,PS-Kurud Distt-Dhamtari CG Ishwar Prasad Soni aged 40 yrs s/o Shri Chandrika Soni Gram: Ogan, P.S.-Pallan Balodabazar : Raipur CG ^5 »»s .&-<-^ • "vr: //£'/ . -ars&s^ \'; ^p^,^^-:'1 '^ II I tt!IA,V»I^A ^. o'o^' \<' ^v^v^' ^-^ >> ^ ^ Tulsi Ram Verma aged 42 yrs s/o Kanhaiya Lal Verma Gram-Tawa,Post-Tarra PS-Dharsiwa, Raipur CG Ganesh Ram Verma aged 40 yrs,s/o G.R.Varma Gram : Kheli : PO : Tarra P.S-Patan,Distt- Durg CG Ambika Prasad Sharma ag^d 38 yrs,s/o.P.P.Sharma Aswani Nagar, Raipur CG Ram a^ec^,' ^O ^£s, Bhydu BarfP : Gram : Mahmara Durg CG s/o Shri Distt- ^ VERSUS - RESPONDENTS ^' 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : The Secretary to the Govt. of CG Department of Home -^' Gaurds : D.K.S.Bhawan : Mantralaya Raig%ir CG .-;""—<•'" r- 1. The Insoector GeneraF'"•.'" Home Gaurds w«'..'<~1 Distt- Raipur CG 3. The Superintendent of Police : Distt : Raipur CG / 4. The District Commandant Home Guards : Raipur CG ^' >>— WRIT PETITION ONDER ARTICLE 226j^e?OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA l-^-<'.-^!SSSlk:.,. HIGHCOURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BU-ASPUR SiNGLEBENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI.A WRIT PETITION (S.l N0.330 W 2007 Petitioners : SheWiar Ram Venna and others versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others Present Mr. S.K.Guha, counsel for Uie petiUonere. Mr. Sushil Dubey, Govemment Advocsds for the State/respendents. ORDER (Passed on 22nd Day of January, 2007) In the present case, the petitionere, worktog as Homa- Guards, were terminated from the service in the year 1983. After a period <rf 20 yeare, the petitionere filed a prtiUon claiming for the retief of quashing of the termination order in Writ Petitton No.3839 of 2WS3. This Court, after having considered the case in Wrtt Patitton No.3839 of 2003, granted liberty to e petitioners, at their request, to make a representatlon for redressal of their grievances before Uie competent auttiorities. The competerrt authorities were aiso directed to conshler their representation in accordance with law. ,Jt appears that respondent No.4 - the District Commandant, by order datad 12-5-2006 (Annexure P-1), rejected the representation of the petitioners after considerlng their cases. —_ ~.^^^'R^^S^^ 4p0^ 2. The second petition for ttie same relief cannot be entertained as a matter of public policy. The adjudicafen has attained finality in Writ Petition No.3839 of 2003 itseff. 3. Thus, this petition isdismissed on the ground of having no merit. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gopal 1