c ,.^\\^ Page No. rirj IN TH£ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) N-rit Petition No. l7"73/2004.y P JS.TZTIONBIS ^S^K ^^°~'x ^>^/- .^c^ ^€- • '*^. 1 ^^^^5m \. ,^^:^^£^ / Ti<'',,,'5V^^3^%\ h'i'/' NrtT&PvYl.^ j ^j ^^^nnj i^-1 r;i ^-"•"^^c^ij^! :41--"&-:r' y-y '^ t? ^..ON.S /' '•^^^^^^- \^lj' ::A'M^ ^r?^^ $ 1. Jagdish Narayan Sharma S/o late shri Jamana Prasad Sharma, aged about 38 years, Constable No. 969, P^S^ Kawakonda, Distt. Dantewada (C»G<) 2. Santosh Kumar S/o Bholaram Kushwah, aged about 35 years, Constable No» 1138, P.S. srrabor, District Dantewada (C.G.). ? 3. Santosh Kumax: Yadav S/o Rajroop Yadav, aged about 36 years, Constable No. 921, P.S* Konta. Distt^ Dantewada (C<|G^)^ 4, Norottam Singh Tekam S/o Bhola Singh Tekara, agea about 37 years, Ctonstable No» 953, P#S» Dantewada, Di stt. Dantewada (C^G,)^ 5, Pravin Kumar Chaturvedi S/o Uma ShankcbT Chatarvecii^ aged atout 28 years, P^S, Kuwakonda, District Dantewada (C.G*). 6, Umesh Kumar Tiwari S/o Ramchhabiley Tiwari, aged about 35 years, Constab" le No. 1169, P.S. Golapalli, Distt. Dantewada (C»G^}, 7, Vinod Patel S/o Ramjiyavan Patel^ aged about 39 years, Constable No<» 523» P*S» Kowakonda, District Dantewada (C^G,), c^y ^;'^>l' ..^^ <^"' contcl^ • •. Pa?i@ No.( p?.-'1 2 8* Ramlal Patel 3/o Mahendramani Patel, aged about 37 years, Ctonstabie P^b^ Kuwakonaa, Distt, Dantewaaa (CG) 9» KaiTialeshwar Mshra S/o Indramani Prasad Misl-ira, aged about 45 years^ Head Constable No, 489, P^S^Kowakonda Distt. Dantewada (C.G.5. 10 • Ramesh Kumar Sharma S/o late Banshpati Prasad Sharma, aged about 40 years, Head Constable NO, 172, P»S< Bacheli Distt^ Dantewadae(^»G«)^ 11, Dhanesh Kumar Pandey S/o Brijeshchand Pandey, agea aboat 42 years^ Head Constai^le No» 124^ P ^. Gadiras^ Distt, Dantewada (C<G»)^ R.J3SPONDEMTS s ,->*--""^"Y.1*"^^^, ..,-;';^. ^,IM^7l> ^ ^l:^t5^'ff^ e^"^-!- '^ t i..:',^ CiV^. -'•^ j -::i-"'^r/^/ "--.^..-^^ '•••'"^Oist.^ 4. ve r su s State of ^ihattisgarh Through : The Secretary, Department of.Home Affairs D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Director General of Police, State of CN^attisgarh^ Raipur (C,G,) Additional Director General of Police (Adniinlstration) Police liead Qaarter Crihattisgarh, Raipar (C^G^) Superintendent of Police^ Dantewada, Distt, Dantewada (C^G,)^ State of Madhya Pradesh Through : secretary, Department of rfome Aftairs, VallaiDh Bhav^an, Bhopal (M«P.). contd< ' c^ ^"- ^ ("-1.) 3 - 6, Assistant Inspector General Police (Aaministration) Police Head Quarter, Bhopal (M.p,). 7, Union of India Throagh : The Secretary, Department of personnel, Pu^lic Grievance and pension, Third Floor, Lok Nayak Bhawan Khan Ma/cKet^ New Deini^ ^^ miT PBriTION UND£R. AiiTICLB 226/227 OP CONSTITUTIOIM OF INDIA .. ,/€T1) XI-HC-22 -3~5Ef ^||^|ld<ll, ^Tll^Ko, [^<ni^y _^.:f.-.N<?.,nz.?/a^^ *^|ch "I^^T' HW<ri{ ^W^h 3TT^T^T R^i5b 3Tlt?T ^RW^I ^TT^T'^iTW "^Tf^T 09.07.2004 Ona inention beiag xnade, iS^ Shri Saatosh Yadav, coiiasel| Shri S.K. Benwal, Serdor| India/respondent no, 1 on advaiice) Shri V.V.S. Mzuthy, Depulj Akhil Agrawal, Panel Lawyer for fh^ i.A. No.4202/2004 for urgenjt Heaid. Counsel for fhe petitioners s^ aUocation of petitioners. He fiirthc|r i.e., W.P.No.578/2004 (Balendra ^ Union of India aad ofhers) orders on 17.12.2003. He also producj 18.6.2004 passed in W.P. 1560/: ofhers -vs- Union of India and ofh€|rs) siDiUar order may be passed m thisj Learaed counsel for fhe resi on fhe statenient of counsel for siaiilar orders may be passed. Haviag con^idercd fhe facts material on record aad consideringj for fhe petitioner at the Bar aad cited above aad fiirfher fhe legal Authorities ia not reUevicig the peti^ioi <=hl^(<rl41r1 "RP^ ^ ftT^t <F5i^i< '^3Tf^R3T1^T inatter is taken up. for fhe petitioners. Paael Lawver for Union of |copy. v Advocate General wifh Shri State. hearing is aUowed, ibniits fhat fhe inatter relates to subinits fhat ia similar niatter (hekhar Mishra ao^d ofhers -vs- Riave been passed by fhis Court ^ed a copy of fhe order dated ;p04 (Jitendra Siagh Toiaar aiid (. Leanied counsel prays fhat case also, ^ondents subinitted fhat relyiag t|he petitioner made at the Bar, jand circumstaaces of fhe case, fhe stateinent inade bv eouiisel ^n view of fhe judgmLent/orders ^osition, the action of the State i^ioners caanot be sustaiaed aad [^ tfea XI-HC-22 -^Sf ^t|^||<^<L|, ^Tl1<1<l<o, I^^IKI^ :-9' STT^T'^T r<rii<=h ^^\ 5h4-iict) <i[^a ^j- 3TT^?T 'CRT^ WW11 ^hHlcb •^l 200 •1^^T" 37T^T'^IT^T'^ftn -^L fhe petitioners are entitled for| directed to reUeve fhe petitloners| prodiiction of a copy of fhis order| Accordiagly, fhis petition Consequentiy, M.W.P.1590J C.C. as per rules. 4)|^41r1 'RTR^f ^ f^st <F3l<^i< ^ 3Rrf^R ^TT^I reUeviag. The respondents are wifhin 15 days froin fhe date of stlands disposed of, 2004 also staads di^posed of Sd/- Fakhruddin Judge ^ ^v