c ^ / &0 IN THE mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 13 '=f- /200S~1~ WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER ^s-'&^.. ...••;•'l /^:v<'. ..•••'" .-•>S~k'^-""' ^'"'A-i^'^0.^"" ^•"^y '.••""" ^*s* ^-" RESPONDENTS ^T. ' Chhanduram Bhagat, aged about 41 years, son of Late Shri Paduwa Ram, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Primary School Charayeedand, Jashpur Nagar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS K c^&1 01. ^COP^ ^Afo^^ PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER State ofChhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) @) HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.(S) No. 117 of Z007 Petitjoners : Atonsingh Khande cnd others Versus Reqiondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh ond o+hers W. P.fS) No. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejnun Bhagat ond o-thers Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt^is9arh and others W. P.fSl No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanjay Kumar Sinha Versus Respondents : S-tate of Chhatt-isgarh ond cnother W. P.(S\ No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner : Bhuvneshwar Prasad ProKihan Versus Respondents : S-tate of Chhattisgarh and o-thers W. P.fS) No. 127 of 2007 Petitioner : Kulmnjan Ekko Versus Respondents : State of Chhatfrisgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : 5mt. Bharti Bai Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and another W. P.fS) No. 129 of 2007 Petitioner : Philos Akshay Mukut Tig9a Versus Reqxmdents ; State of Chhatfrisgdrh ond cnother W. P.(S) No. 130 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Prasadi Bha9at Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and uwther W. P.{S) No. 131 of 2007 Petitioner : Sagar Sai Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt'isgarh and o-thers W. P.(S) No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Inus Bek Versus Respondents ; Stoite of Chhatt'iS9arh ond nno-ther W. P.fSl No. 134 of 2007 Petitioner ; Baliram Bhogat Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond another W. P.fS) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner : Avmash Chandra Xalco Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and o-thers W. P./S1 No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. ShashikalaBhagat Versus Respondents : State of ChhatHs9arh and wwther W. P.(S) No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduram Bhagat Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond onother W. P.fS) No. 139 of 2007 Petitioner : Ku. Clementina Ti9ga Versus Respondents ; 5tate of Chhatt-isgarii and ano-ther W. P.(S) No. 145 of 2007 Petitioner ; Krishna Ram Patel Versus Respondents : State ofChharttisgarh ond others '^ W. P.fS^No. 147 of 2007 Petitioner : Laxminaroyan Patel Versus ftespondents ; State of Chhattisgarh ond ono+her W. P.(S) No. 149 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Mnxi Miliyani Toppo Versus ftespondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and onolher W. P.(S) No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Rajmani Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-is9arh ouid others W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner : Oiamru Ram Nagdeo Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgdrh and others W. P.fS) No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Sanesh Ram Pradhan Versus Respondents : State of Chhattiqarh ond ano-ther W. P.(S) No. 161 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhotelat Khanna Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond ono-ther W. P.(S) No. 165 of 2007 Petitioner : Ramkumar Choudhari Versus Respondents : State of Chhatfrisgarh ond onolher And W P.(S) No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner : Brijmohan Nayak Versus Respondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh and ono-ther SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J Preaent: Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocnte for the petitioner(s). Mrs. Anju Ahuju, Depu-ty 6<wemment Advocate, Mr. Arvind Oubey, Panel Lawyer, Ms. &inita Jain, Panel t-owyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on this 17th Day of Jonuary, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appeau-ing for •riie petitioners as well as for •the S'tate/respondents jointly submit 1+iat the facts of the present writ petitions ure simibr to Ihat of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and olhers vs. State Sovemment of Chhatt-isgarh & others), which tiws allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit that the question of hw involved is also the same. Subhash 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. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwnri ond others vs. State Sovemment of Chhatt-isgarh & others). No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be ploced on record in o'ther connected writ petitwn. _-—- sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge