. - ^,. E-. ¥? ~ ? -'l-.'ilisS" c. ^ f^-D'2— . (2) IN THE HIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. /f6 /2086-oy PETITIONER .•••:^l/' ^•y \^?>" ...-•• °^s?x .<"> ^-A ,^''. >^-' ..;' •?•'*' ^c.cy RESPONDENTS Pramod Singh Paikara S/o Shri Gambhir Singh Paikara Age about 39 years, AssistantTeacher, Govt. Primary School, Damkhancha, Block - Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) VERSUS 1 ^' ^ State Government of Chhattisgarh Through:- Secretary, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) AssistantCommissioner TribalWelfare Department, Korba (C.G.) District Education Officer Korba(C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer Kartala, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitioner most humbly submit as under:- y^ ..d^v'^y ^t^8"' ^?a) WW COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P. fS) No. 111 of 2007 Petitioners ; Hemont Singh Kamwr ond another Versus Respondents : Stute 6ovemment of Chhattisgarh andolhers W. P. (Sl No. 112 of 2007 Petitioner : Chunni Singh Markom Versus Respondents : State Sovemmesnt of Chhcrttisgarh and olhers W. P. CSl ^to. 114 of 2007 Petitioner : Kamal Singh Paikuro Versus Respondents : Storhe Sowmment of Chhcrttisgarh ando'thers W. P. fS) No. 11S <rf 2007 Petitioner : Phulsoy Paikaro Versus Respondents : State Sovemment of Chhattisgarh <md o-thers And w. p. ra No. ii6 of 2007 Petitioner : Ppanwd Singh P&ikara Versus Respondents : Stute 6ovemment of Chhuttisgarh ondo-thers SB: Hon'bteMr. Justice Satish K. /Ignihotri. J 5hri Aysy Shrivastava, Advoccrte fbr -tfie petitioners. 5mt. Anju Ahujai, Depu-ty Sovemment Advocate for the n^iondents/Stnte. OROER (Passed on 16th <fay of Janumy, 2007) The following order of the Cwjrt' is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri, J. 1, Leamed counsel appeoring for 1tie petitioners as well as teamed Deputy ffovemment Adyoccrte cppearing for the respondents/State jomtly submit thnt the facts of -the present ca«are similar +o that of in W. P. (s) 6108 of 2006 (Rajkumari W/o ffi.K. Dilliwar Vs. The Stnte 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh A others), »»hichwos dijposed of vide order tlated 8ttl November, 2006. They further submit that the question of low involwd is also •(he same. 2. In view of -the above stated submissions nwide by leamed counsel for tfie part-ies. these wit petitions ane diqwsed of in terms of the order dated 8ftl November, 20)6 passed by tiiis Cwrt in W. P. (.s) 6108 of 2006. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be ploced on record m o-ther conneeted writ petitions. Sd/- SatishK.Agnibotn Judge