& ^^"f^. C^-l 3-71 IN THE GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) N0. l2-8 /20e6-0> WRTT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PETITIONER ...^' '^^ RES^NDENTS ^y ..\^y' ^o ^ - fo ^c^- <-^>% 1.. ^ /Sint. Bharti Bai, aged about 44 years, .widow of Late Vind Kumar Bairagi, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Primary School Tikaitganj, Jashpiir, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) Gv'01. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER cause title. HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.fSl No. 117 of 2007 Petitioners : Mansingh Khande ond others Versus Respondents : State of Othatl-isgarh and o-thers W. P.fSlNo. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejram Bhagat cnd others Versus Respondents : 5tate of ChhattiS9arh and others W. P.(S) No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanjay Kumar Sinha Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and ono-ther W. P.fSl No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner ; Bhuvneshwor Prasad Prachan Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgorh cnd o-thers W. P.fSl No.127 of M07 Petitioner ; Kulranjon Ekka Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-iqarh and others W. P.(S\ No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Bharti Bai Versus Respondents : S-tate of Chhatt-isgarh ond onother W. P.fS) No. 129 of 2007 Petitioner ; Phibs Akshoy Mukut Tig9a Versus Respondents ; State of Chhartisgarh and onother W. P.(S) No. 130 of 2007 Petitioner ; Smt. Prasadi Bhagat Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ano-tiier W. P.(S) No. 131 of 2007 Ptetitioner : Sagar Sai Versus Re^ondents : State of Chhat^is9arh and olhers W. P.fS) No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Inus Bek Versus Respbncknts : State of Chhartisgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 134 of 2007 Petitioner : Baliram Kiagat Versus ftespondents : State of Chhatt-iS9arh and another W. P.(S) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner : Avinash Chondra Xalco Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. 5hashikala Bhagat Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ano-ther W. P fS) No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduram Bhagat Versus Respondents : Stoite of Chhutt-isgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 139 of 2007 Petitioner : Ku. Clementina Tig9a Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-iS9arh and onother W. P.(S) No. 14S of 2007 Petitioner ; Kridina Ram Patel Versus Re^ondents : Stute of Chhattis9arh ond o-thers W. P.fS)Nk>. 147ofa)07 Petitioner ; Laxminamyon Patel Versus Respondents : State of ChhatfriS9arh and cnother W. P.fS) No. 148 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Ataxi Miliyoni Toppo Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh ond onother W. P.(S) No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Rajmoni Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner ; Chamru Ram Nagdeo Versus Respondents : State of ChhatHsgou+i and o'thers W. P.(S) No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanesh Ram Pradhan Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and another W. P.fS) No. 161 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhotelal Khonna Versus Re^ondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P.fS) No. ifS of 2007 Petitioner : Ramkumar Choudhari Versus fteqiondents : State of ChhattiS9arh ondonother And W P.fS) No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner : Brijmohan Nayak Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond another 4 SB: Hon'ble AAr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J Present: Mr. A.N. Bhaklu, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mrs. Mfi Ahu^i. Oepu-ty Sovemment Advocate, Mr. Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer, Ms. Sunita Jain. Ponel Lawyer for •the respondents/Storfe. ORDER (Passed on 1+iis 17th Day of January, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel oppearing for -the petitioners as well us for the Stcrte/respondents jointly submit •that -rtie focts of the present writ petitions ore similur to that of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari ond olhers vs. State fiovemroent of Chhattisgarh A others), which NUS allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They •ftjr'ther submit •that the question of law mvolved is also -thesame. 2. In view of the above-stated submissions made by leamed counsel for the parties, •these writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in WP. (5.) No. 5976/Z006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State Sovemment of Chhatrtsgarh & o-thers). No order as to costs. '^ SuMwth 3. A copy of -this order be ptaced on record in other coimected writ petitkni. -— Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge