51NSIS BENGH ^3^7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR, WRIT PETITION (C) N0. 3^° ) o{2011 PETITIONERS /> ^.•'.-/' ^M> ^ui^r V --.'i-'' ^ ^' .\^ ^' 1. Krishna Kshatriya, Jhandu Kumar S/o Shri Singh Kshatriya, aged 46 years, Occupation- Teacher, Government Middle School, Piparpara, Tahsil- Kota, District- Bilaspur, R/o D.P Law College Road, Ashok Nagar, Sarkanda Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 2. Smt Shakun Kshatriya, W/o Shri Krishna Kumar Kshatriya, aged 45 years, R/o D.P Law College Road, Ashok Nagar, Sarkanda Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 3. Vineeta Singh Kshatriya, D/o Shri Krishna Kuruar Kshatriya, aged 20 years, R/o D.P Law College Road, Ashok ^' Vs RESPONDENTS Nagar, Sarkanda Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Technical Education, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. The Director, Department of Technical Education, Polytechnic Preraises, Barren Bazar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Government Engineering College, Through its Principal, Koni, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh 4. The Principal, Governm.ent Engineering College, Koni, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. WRIT PET1TION UNDER ARTICLE 2260V THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER (S): As per the cause title. ?---•- - -"•^ n e? :y~J'^ <s^ t,fc HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WMT PETmON (C) No. 3609 of2011 PETmQNER RESPQNDENT8 Kridma Kumar Kshatriya & Others. VERSUS Slate ofCfahattisgaita & Otfaers. WRIT PElinON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTFTUION OF INDIA SB: Hon'bte Shri Sattsh K. AenBiotrii. J. Preseut: Shri Sameer Shrivastaya, Advocate for tfae petitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Depuly Govenament ^vocate forthe State/respondente. ORDERfORAL) (Passed on 08tb day <xfJuly,2011) 1. Leamed counsel appeariag for the petitioners subiaits that 1fae petitioner No. 3 is the dau^iter ofpetitioner No. 1 and 2, who is the student ofBaehelor ofEngiaeermg and pursuing ter studies at respondent No. 4/eollege. Shri Shrivastava furfher submits that the petitioner No. 3 is entitled to refimd oflhe tuition fee wfaidi she has ah-eady paid and furlher, exemption from paymenit oftuition fee for the remaining academic period, in accordance with the circular dated 31.10.2002 whieh adqrted the circular dated 30.11.1989 as&e petftionerNo. 1 and 2 arelfae green eardholders. Shri Shrivastava next contends that Ifae issue involved in tiiis petition has already been considered and deeided by tiris Coint in Dr. (Major) Thakur Ajit Singh & Others v. State ofChhattisgarh & Others . Thus, this petition may also be disposed of in fhe saroe tenns. 2. Leamed eounsel appearing for tfae State/respondents submits that adtnittedly, the issue with regard to exanption aad refund of '• W.K(C) No. 7222/2009, decided on 27.09.20i0 3nr ^^t^Ssss^. 3. 4'? '-')' tuition fee oftte children ofthe green card holders was coasidered by this Court in the aforestated petition and this petition may also be disposed ofinthe same terms, however, liberty may be reserved to the State/respandents to verify the faets, as pleaded ia the petition. In view of fhe above subiaissioas made by leamed counsel appearing for the parties, tfae petition is disposed of ia tenns ofthe wder passed in Dr. ffulajor) Thakur Ajit Singh & Others (supra), subjeetto verificatiwi ofthe &cts. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Ainit