•S 3Ba. '"roi.1: (? f^l z<a/ <}UJ -IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) N0.^-s ^^- /2006 WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PETITIONER ^y^ ^.41'^"" ,'(?•.^ ^•••'^' ,.,fisy\ . ^".A.-' KESPONDENTS 1. 2. ^Mainar Sai Paikra, aged about 42 years, son of Shri Tuna Sai, Assistaht Teacher, Govemment Tribal Primary School Vimda, Bagicha, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) (SL.NO. 98 ofAnnexure P-1) VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Assistant Commissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) ' The Block Education officer, Block Bagicha, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) 01. PARTICULARS ABOUT TFIE PETITIONER As per cause title. HI6H COURT OF CHHAmSfiARH AT KtLASPUR W. P. (s) No. 7SOO of ZOOft Retitioher : Pcnch Rann Navrung Versus Respondents : Stnte of ChhattiSBarfi and orxrther W. P. fal Na. 7301 af 2006 Petitioner ; Jugal Rom Chakresh Versus Respondents ; Stcrte of Chhattjsnarh and another W. P. fal NB.TBOZaf 2006 Petitioner : Jagdidi Chdndro Yadav Versus Respondents : Storte of Chhattlsoarh and onolhBr W. P. falNo. 7B03trf200& Petrtioner : Dici Sai Pkiikru Verajs Respondents : State of Chhofiagurh ond onolher W. P. fal No. 7B04 af 200& Petitioner : ^klndl<e3ht»arRan Bhcgat Versus Respondents : Stirte of Chhatttegurh and anolher W. P. (s) No 790S af 2006 Petitioner : SamekilKhuntB Versus Respondents : Storte of ChhuttisBarh ond ano-rtier W. P. fal NB. 72U8 rf 2006 Petrtwner : Smt. Philomina Kindo Versus Respondents : State of Chhornisgarh and ono-ther W. P. fal Nn. 7S09 <rf 2006 Petitioner : Shyan Sunder Yodaw Respondents ver!?"s StateofChhattisaarfiflndono-ther W^P. ta) No. TOIO af 2006 Petitioner : 1-lilariyus Kujur Verau Respondents : Stateof Chhattisgarh ond olhers W^. ts) Na 7B11 <rf 2006 PetitkNier : Ku. Rnjkumari Oaharhn Versus Responctentsi : State of Chhcrttisourh andothers W. P. falNn. 7B12af2006 Petitioner : Rang Valhbh Siokn- Versus Respondents : Stnte of OihatHsoarh ond anolher W. P. (s) Nn. 7B13 <rf 2006 Petitioner : Rumckilar Keshkor Versus Respwdents : S-hrte of Chhattisoarh ond o'thers W.P. fa^Ntt 7B14Bf2006 PetH-ioner : Prudyuinn Kumar Versus Respondents : S-fate of Chhattisoarh and o-thers W. P. falNn TOlBBf2006 Petitkmer : Smt. Lujashiya MmJ Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgurh ond anoltier W. P. (s\ No. TO16 <rf 200& Petitioner : Timo'thhus Toppo Versus Respondents : Storte of ChhoWiiaarh and olhers W. P. (f) Nn 7B17 nf 2006 Petitioner : AmritKumar Versus : StateofChhattisewrfiandolhers Reawndents w. p. (s) NB. reia <rf 200A Petitioner :. Duku'Ekta Versus RespCTufents : Stste ofChhcrMisourh o»ido-lhers W. P. falNa 7B19fl(!20(tt Petitioner : Alfrad Kujur Versus Respondents : Storte of Chhattisoarh and cno'lher W. P. fal hk> TBZlof 200& Petitioner : Probhu Sui Tiricy Versus Respondents : Stnte of Chhattisgar+i and others W.P.falNo. 7B22<rf200& Petitioner : JoganncrthRnm Veraus Respondents : Stnte of Chhattisoarh and o-thers W. P. falfrto. raZ3<rf20Q& Petitwner : Atomar Sai Pkrikro Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh <nd oltiers W. P. fal No. 7S24 nf a)06 Petitioner : Smt. Rdbeka Mmj Versus Respondents : StnteofChhattisgarhcndolhers W. P. Crt NB. fffZQOd Petitioner : Ajit Kumnr Tirky Versus Respondents : StoitBofChhattiSBarhaiddnoltier And W P AA Ma TK&rf 200& Ptetitioner : Rnmkuniar B-ijans ResaondentsW"" StateofChhattisdnrhmdanolher SB: Hon'bk Mr. Justice Satirit K. AgnihoW. J Mr. AM. Bhakta, Advocate for the petitwners. Mrs. Anju Ahuja, Oeputy Sovemment Advocate for the reapondent^State. OR&ER (P&ssed <m 9* day of January, 2007) 1. Leamed cotawel oppearmg for Ihe petitroners us t»ell as teumed Depu'ty 6ovemment Advocorte oppearing for the reapondenta/State johitly submit 1hat the faets of the present case are simiku' to that of in W. P. (s) 5976 of 2006 (Sushil Tnmri A olhers Vs. State ficvt. of ChhattisgcB+t & o'thers), which was allowed vide order dated T* November, 2006. They further aubmit tho* •the question of lai» invotwd is also •the snroe. 2. Ih view of the above stoted subroissions made by kamed counsel for •the partie*. -these writ petitions are albwed «n tcrms of th< order duted 7tlt November. 2006 passed by -this Court in W. P. (s) 5976 of 2006. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of •Ihis order be placed on record in olher connected writ petitions. Subhash Sd/- SatishK.Ag Judge