f>:.^. SINSLEBEMgM C-^ 0^^-^ (2) INTHE HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S)NO.: €5o12W1 PETITIONERS ^ .^tl^ l^^-^^ ^^ -••'". '9'f^^y'' ^•^y ^y^ ,..1« wS- ^0^ ^E^ >^ Y" '., ^'^ 4^^I^ ^ ^y' s. /" /5. /' Govind Narayan Paikra S/oShriSamundSingh Age about 39 years, Lo. Div.Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Chhyhiyapara, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba(Q.G.) BrijbhooshanSinghKanwar S/oShriTirath SinghKanwar Age about39 years, Lo. Div.Teacher, Govt. Middle School,Supatarai; Block - Kartala, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) Hira SinghPaikra S/o Shri Sadh Ram Kanwar Age about45 years, Lo. Div. Teacher, Govt. Boys Primary SchQol.Barpali, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) Rup Singh Binjhwar S/o Shri Jhuru Singh Binjhwar Age about40 years, Lo. Div.Teacher, Govt. MiddleSchool, Jarwe, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) Mohar Singh Kanwar S/o ShriSundarSingh Kanwar Ageabout37years,Lo.Div.Teacher, Govt. PrimarySGhpol.Bandhapali, BlQck - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.Q.) Smt.JiwanlatalVtinj W/o Shri Prahlad Minj ' ;^^ ..s^ Ageabout41years, Lo.Div.^p^laeig! Qovt.PrimarySchQOl.Baigapara, -^ Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba"(C.Q.) ^ ;'i^' .'A/ RESPONDENTS y (3) 7. AmarSingh Rathiya 1 S/Q StirtChamraSingh Bathiya -' ^ Ageabout41 years, LQ. Div.Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Nawapara, Block -Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) ^. IVIelaRamYadav S/oShriPanch RamYadav Age about42 years, Lo. Div.Teacher, Gbvt. PrimarySchool, Junapara Bdtali, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) VERSUS 1. StateGovernment ofChhattisgarh Through:- Secretary, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. DistrictEducationOfficer Distt.-Korba(C.G.) Block EducationOfficer - Block- Kartala, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTCTUT!QN_Qf^lNDIA H R <-- la HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.(S) No. 630of 2007 Petitioners •' Sovind NarayonPaikra and others Versus Respondents S1ate of Chhatt'isgarh oind others SB: Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J Preserft'. Atr. Ajcy Shrivustnvu, AdvocateforThepetitioneRS. Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the pespondents/State. OR t> E R (Passed on this 2nd Day of February, 2007) 1. Ledmed counail oppearing for the petitioners as well as for the S-tate/respondents jointfy aibmit that the facts of •rtie present writ petition are simihr to that of m W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State Sovernment of Chhatt-isgarh & otiiers), which was alloiwd vide order dated 7.11.2(X)6 (Annexure P/19). They further submit that the question of Iflw involved isalso the same. 2. In yiew of the above-stated submissions made by teamed counsel for the parf'ies, the wpit petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in W.P. (5.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Twwri and others vs. State Sovemfflent of Chhattisgarh & others). No order as to costs. *" Sd/-:: j ! •;Satisli;Kg^|