Na fila m (we; .VV ?'//L/a’vuy k ile’K’k. * (,07Wy ‘3 Y‘sElQ) APPLICANTS :-' l. Ranganath Naurange, Son ofJagirathi Naurange, aged 33 year workng as Upper Division Teacher at Govt. Higher Sccondary School, Lenghara, 'Narkela District Raigarh resident of Rajiv Gandhi Nagar, Mithumuda, Raigarh 2. Jeevandhar Paikra, Son of Johan Singh Paikra aged 32 years working as Upper division teacher at Govt. Higher Secondary School Amora Takhatpur, District Bilaspur resident of Village Murmur Kodbhar Pendra, District Bilaspur. 3. Ramlal Khairwar, Son ofChain singh Khairwar, aged 34 years working as Upper division teacher at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Pali District Korba resident of Salihabhata, Post Nonibarra, District Korba. 4. Prakash Lakda, Son ofKere Lakda, aged 34 years, working as Upper division teacher at Govt. Higher Secondary School Birra, District Champa Janj gir resident ofTirgitti, Tarbahar, Hiranagar, Bilaspur. 5. Manrnel Lakda, Son of Sukhiram Lakda, aged 30 years, working as Upper Division Teacher at Govt. Higher Secondary School, Hasod, Via. Birra, District Janjgir, Resident of Torwa, Old Power House; Bilaspur O A OF 2001 VERSUS RESPONDENTS :- The State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.Bhawan, Raipur. Chhattisgarh. 2. The Director, Public Instructions School Education, Government ofChhattisgarh, Jail Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, Opposite Collectorate Office, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raigarh Chhattisgarh. 5. District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, Korba Chhattisgarh. 6. District Education Officer, Government of Chhattisgarh, Janj gir Champa Chhattisgarh. Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 198. 5 DETAILS OF APPLICATION L Particulars ofthe Applicants : As given in the cause titleofthe application. $5 : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan§ 13-03m201a Shri M. D. Dhote, counsel fortf Shn‘ Satish Gupta, G‘A. far the Heard. The petitioners have med this; been given to Asst. Teachers appoint: approached the Tribune! by fiiing Orig 24.8.1992), wherein Tribunal directed stated that the State chalienged the 52 No.6892HQQB which was dismissed vi e order dated 3.1 .1994. in number of cases. this Comt has passed orders directing the respondents to consider the cases. Aocordtngiy, this petition is ais disposed of with liberty to the petitionersto make representation. if so advised, t consider their cases on its own merits and perspective. if the petitioners stand on th same footings as per order passed by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrativ Tribunal in OIA. No.2745/89 (Madhakenz ‘t’adi: amt 5’3 others tie. 3iate oftiti. t & what's) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (Ci 'l) No.6892I93 by order dated 3.11994, appropriate orderwouid be passed by the respondents authority. / Sdl Judg ,hrivastava, J t e petitioners‘ State. retition claiming the similar henems as have ad in between the year 1983-1984 who had linai Application No274521989 (decided on aenet'its to be given t0 all teachers. it is also id order before the Supreme Court in SLP. r/.,. ava e