T 1:1 C ^- I'TTO </—- IN THE mOH COURT OF CIfflATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITIONfSINO. /2 3 /20Q&^- WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF DsTDIA, PETITIONER ^•^ /^^- •••"A<^v+' ' ..•• ?f**' n\« \oy^-j:y'' ^?- >^-^•"J^^ <5 :^ S<*'RES'PONDENT_S .r. ,/-'Ku. Clementina Tigga, aged about 45 years, daughter of Juliyus Tigga, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Janpad Primary School Kinkel, Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) l'^':^<t«LAS.rU» ^i- The District Education Officer, Distt. ^^.W^O'1Bwrw' ' Jashpur (C.G.) 01. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER As per cause title. HI6H COURT OF CHHATnS6AftH AT BILASPUR W. P.(S) No. 117 of 2007 Petitioners : Monsingh Khande ond others Versus Respondents : State of Oihatt-isgarh and o-thers W. P.fSlhto. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejram Bhogat ond o-thers Versus Reqiondents : State of Chhattisgarh and o-thers W. P.fS) No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner : Sonjay Kuniar Sinha Versus Re^ondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and ono-ther W. P.fS) No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner ; Bhuvneshwar Prasad Pradhan Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.fSl No. 127 of Z(%)7 Petitioner : Kulrunjon Ekka Versus Respondents : State of Chhuttisgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Bharti Bou Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and onother W. P.(S) No. 129 of 20)7 Petitioner ; Philos Akshay Mukut Ti9ga Versus Respondents : State of Chhaftisgorh and ano-ther W. P.(S) No. 130 of 2007 Petitipner : Smt. Prosadi Bhcgat Versus (le^ondents : S-tate of Chhattisgarh and anolher @ W. P.(S) No. 131 of 2007 Petitioner : Sagar Sai Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt'isgarh and o-thers W. P.fSl No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Inus Bek Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh ond another W. P.fS) No. 134 of 2007 Petitioner : Baliram Bhogat Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgou4i and onother W. P.(S) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner ; Avinash Chandra Xalco Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and o-thers W. P.(S) No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Shashikala Bhngat Versus Reqwndents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P fS) No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduram Bha9at Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh and another W. P.fS) No. 139 of 2007 Petitioner : Ku. ClementBia ^990 Versus Respondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh and onother W. P./S) No. 145 of 2007 Petitioner : Kridina Ram Patel Versus Respondents : State of Chhanisgarh ond others W. P.fS^No. 147 of 2007 Petitioner : Laxminaraycn Patel Versus Respondents : Stnte of Chhatt-isgarh ond oawther W. ?.(S) No. 149 of 2007 Petitwner : Smt. AAaxi Miliyani Toppo Versus Re^iondents ; State of ChhaMisgarh ond onother W. P.fS^No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Rcymoni Versus Respondents ; State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner : Chamru Ram Nogdeo Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh ond o'thers W. P.fSl No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Siniesh Kam Pradhan Versus Respondents : Storte ofChhattisgarh ond ono-ther W. P.(S) No. 161 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhotelal Khanna Versus Respondents : State of Chhattis9arh and another W. P.(S) No. i66 of 2007 Petitioner : ftamkumar Choudhari Versus Reqaondents : Stute of Chhattis9arh ond ono-ther And W. P fS) No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner : Brijmohan Nayak Versus ftespondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond onother €^ SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sfftish K. Agnihotri. J Present: Mr. A.N. Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mrs. Anju Ahuju, Depu-ty Sovemment Advocate, Mr. Arvind Dubey. Panel Lawyer, AAs. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for 1+ie respondents/State. ORDER 0>assed on 1+iis 17th &ay of Jnnuary, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel oppearing for the petitioners as well as for •the State/respondents jointly submit -ttiat the facts of the present writ petitions are similcB- to 1+iat of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and o-thers vs. Stntte fiovemment of Chhatt'iS9arh & o-thers), which NWS allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit that the questwn of law involved is also -the same. "•» Subhosh 2. In view of the above-stated submissions made by leamed counsel for the parties, •these writ petitions are allowed m terms of the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in WP. (S.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and others vs. State Sovemment of Chhaftis9<irh A others). No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be placed on record in other connected writ petition. Sd/- Sadsh K. Agnihotri Judge