fSiSiiffiW ,-jl Xl c^\^2. IN THE HIC3H COURT OF CHMATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) NQ. ^t'36 /2006 PETITIONER ^ ^ • /••'csy'- '9- .^•\<^ ^^ ^- ^SESPQNDENTS ^. ^^'y N\1'^ I. 2. <&• ^Njktp Ram, aged about 47 years, .son of. Shri' Kamlakaht, Assistant Teacher, Goverhment Prirnary School - Dharamjaigarl-i Colony, Tahsil Dharamjaigarh, District Raigarh (CG), \ VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh, 1'hrough- •Secretary, Department of Sctiool Education, Dau Kalyan Sirtgh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer Raigarh (CG) : y <^° WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/3S^OFTHE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA, 1 HI^CCH^OFGMWACTIS&^RHiAT-flffl.ASPUR W ff fid No 7136/ 2006 Petitioner : Nikto Ram VerajS Respondenls : 5lwts of Chhattisgarh <md another SB; HonlileMr. JusticeSatish K. ^yuhotri, J Mr. A.N. Wtd<ta, Adwce e for Ite petitioner. Mr. Arun 5ao,6ovemraent Advocate for the respondents/Statis. QRbER <Pa,sse<lon2^t<l(K)rofOec®mber,20Q6) "Fhe following order of the Court js pas^ed by Satish ((. Agnihotri. J. 1. LeaFned coun^l (^pearing ^r -rtie petitioner as w»ll as teamed Sovemment Advoeate aRpeaFing for the respondents/State jointly subreit that the facts of the present case mv. sinnitar to •that of in W. P. (55 No. 6479 of 2006 (5ushil Kumar Shukla Vs. State of Chhtt'ttisgttrh & o'thars), whiA was disposed of vids order dftfed 25* of Noveniber, 2006. They fur'ther submit that the question of leu» involved is also thesame. 2. In vtew of the above stated submissions inade by leamed counsel for the part'ies, this petition is disposed of n terms of the order dated 25tt' of Nftvambw, 200& passad by -this Court in W. P. (5) No.6479 of 2006. No order as to costs. Bablu Sd/- Satish K. Ag Judge