^JW HIGH GOURT OFCHHATTI8GARH AT BILASPUR WRIT.IIETIT;roNlS),_No.3&t8.of'200£'.'.-^. ,..: • .:: . Sani Ram SA) Sisahuram, ^age: 60 years ^ Permanent Ex-Gangman 'J PWD Villa^- Mudhpar Distt - Janjgir CTu^apa.^C.G;) ..- • 'VERSIIS'" " •^-~.;.^:,.---:,.: • . ': 1) '^State ''of Ghhattisgarh, Throiigh; Secretary, . Public Works : Deptt, Mantralaya, D.K.S. ^ Bhawan - Raipur(C.G.) ':! 2) Sub Divisioaal Qfficer, PWD, Sub-Division JanjgirDistt-JaiijgiTChampa(C.G.) WRTT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 Ot THE CaNSTmJTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER RESPONDENTS 8ineteBen.ch: Hon'l^JusticfrShii'Sati^KAffluhotri^ ;t^l ::i ^:^f/t~^' Present: Shri Ashok \raishriav with Shri Sameer Sahu, Advocate forthe petttioner. - : , ' ' ;' :~: ^ "•"/i''; ;: ":' Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Goyt. Advocate for f&e State/respondents. ••ORDER.-- "..-•:' •- . . , ^ 1. 2. (Pas^d off 28UIaay'of June,.200'7) - ; Leamed counsel Etooearine &r the petitiorfer ^as- .well as fbr the State/respondentsjointlysubmit that the facts ofthepresentwit petition are similar to fhat;dfin%.P. No,^454/2005 (Ram Prasad Yadav & Othere vs. State of ClihattisgarB & Others), which was allowed vide ordei dated 4.1.2007. They lurther submitthatfhe questionoSa'w involvedis alsothe same. • • Y . - ' . •-.. In view ofthe above-stated submission made by ttie leamed counsel for the parties, the wnt'.petition is aUowed uitenm c^ order dated 04.01.2007 passed:1aX:1luff-Court'mW.P. N6. 454/2006 (Ram Prasad Yadav & Ofhers Vs; State of Chhattisgarh & Others), subject to verificationofthefacts.Noorderastocosts. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri .'•S-wJudge Amit