-t c ^ ^l IN_THE liONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^ . .., WRIT PETITION No. r7S>4'i' /2006 PETITIONERS ,^.<-;"6& 1. Santoshi Thakur (Sen), Daughter of Ram Chandra Thakur, aged about 35 years, -«*' .iT'"'-\ /.<*' <^A>" ^y ^- ',.<;" ^jY.-' y^y -.••'* resident of VUlage/Post ^1'". y,- ^..•••' Birgaon, Dharsiva, District Raipur (C.G.). ^ 2. Krishna Mishra, wife of Shri Ghan Shyam Mishra, ViUage/Post AmUpadar, Tahsil Bindra Navagarh, Deo Bhog, District Raipiir (C.G.). l( <- G ..^^ ,?..°•"" VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Education Department (Ministry), D.K.S. Bhawan, G.E.Road, Raipur (C.G.). 2. Deputy Director of F'ublic Institution, Education Departraent, Post Office - Pension Bada, Arvind Nagar Ward, Raipur (C.G.). 3. Block Education Officer, P.0. Dharsiwa, District-Raipur (C.G.). 4. Block Education OfEicer, P.0. Deo Bhog, Disfrict - Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/£2??OFTHE ~K. " CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition (St No. 7647 of 2006 Petitjoners Santoshi Thakur (Sen) & another Versus Respondents : State ofChhattjsgarh and others SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri, J Present: Shri, Alok Nigam, counsel for the petitioners. Ms. Deepali Pandey, P.L. for the respondents/State. OR D E R (Passed on 21st Oay of February, 2007) tt is submitted that the facts and question of law invotved in the present petition are same to that of in Ram Sahay Jha Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others (Original Application No. 15/1995). The Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, by its judgment and order dated 16/2/19^, allowed the application ofthe petitioner therein. Leamed counsel for the petitioners seete permission of this Court to approach the r^pondente/State for consideration and disposal of the petifeners case in terms of the order dated 16/2/1996 passed in the case of Ram Sahay Jha (Supra) by Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents/State fairiy agrees with ttie submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are granted liberty to make a representation before the respondente-State Authorities for ttieir decision on the repr^entation in the light of the order dated 1S/2/1996 passed in the case of Ram Sahay Jha (Supra), in accordance with taw, on its own merit, within reasonabte time. With the above-stated tiberty, this petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge ,*:.- ^S'^^^^'-y^S&Si