IN THE HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (C) No. 6S 'H OF 2011. PETITIONER )}k& .f^l-lA' UA0-y h^><"^.> ^^6^y :y\'y--'' y c.i'-' .,••" SS>--" ^? ^""^- RESPONDENTS .,l£-— /y .- ^r^-;^"^?' .:..•,? '^ ff'^. I! ^: --:; ^ il"' ^-^! .. ^ ^.-^ ^jj Y'W- -^^ ^^%^B%-S^ Durgesh Verma, S/o. Shri Mahesh Prasad Verma, aged about 21 years, R/o. Gali No. 4, Geetanjali Nagar, Karbala Road, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.). VERSUS -,-1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretaiy, School Education Department, D.K.S- Bhawan, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) 2. C.G. Board of Secondary Education, Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Through the Secretary C.G. Board of Higher Education Pension Bada Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) 3. Board of Higher Secondary Education Delhi, Through the Secretary Board of Higher Education Delhi, Rajputana Lal Bhawan No. 17, Gopalpurgaon, (Timarpur) Post Office Aazadpur, Delhi-9 -4. Panchvati Higher Secondary School Through the Principal, Panchvati Higher Secondary School Near Old High Court, Bilaspur, Distt.Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PBTIT10NJJNDERARTICLE 226 QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1 HIGH COURT OF CHMAniSGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRITPETITION (C) N0.6878 OF 2011 Durgesh Verma Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution oflndia) Single BenGh : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri R.K. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri V.V.S. Murthy, Dy. Adv. General for the State. Shri R.S. Patel, Advocate for the respondent No.2. ORDER (Passed on this 21st day of November, 2011) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. At the very outset, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that this petition is squarely covered by the decision of fhis Court in Amit Kindo & Others v. The State of Chhattisgarh & Others and prays that fhis petition may be disposed of in the same terms, to which learned Gounsel appearing for the respondents have no objection. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in terms of Amit Kindo (supra) and the respondent authorities are directed to consider the application form ofthe petitioner and thesame shall not be rejeGted on the grounds contained in the impugned order dated 25-9-2009 (Annexure - P/1), because the aforesaid order would not be relatable to the case of the petitioner^. Gowri Sd/- SATISH K. ANGNIHORI Judge