IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAsPUR WRIT PETITION $ NO. a OF 2010 cgmmb / PETITIONERS: 1. Sushi! Bhar'Ti s/oL Shri Amrif Lal, aged abou? 30 yéar's, Occupafion e Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayaf Lakhafpur, Dist‘l'. Surguja (C.G.) 2. Ramhari Sharma S/o late $hri Gunr‘aJ Sharma aged about 42 year's Occupation Working as Dally Wages employee Nagar Panchayal’ Lakh'al'pur, Disfl. Surguja (C.G.) Dineshwar' Gupta, S/o. Shri Baijnafh Gupta, aged about 44 years Occupation = Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 4r“ Panda Ram, JS/o. Chhatra Sai, aged about 25 years, Occupation e Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, ~Distt. Surguja (C.G.) Mala Thakur, s/o. late $hri Prabhu Thakur, aged about 3O years, Occupation s Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 6/ Shivnandan Ram S/o. Aaiya Ram, aged about 26 years, Occupation = Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (CG) 7/ Vinesh Ram S/o late Shri Chamru Ram aged about 34 years Occupation i ~ Working as Daily Wages employee Nagar Panchayat Lakhatpur Distt SurgUJa (C 6) . I @ / 8. Rujkumar', S/o. late Shri Tibul, aged abouf 43 years, Occupation g Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayaf Lakhatpur, Disff. Surguja (C.G.) 9.Ramjee‘r Ram, 5/0. Shri Rup Sai, aged abou‘l' 27 year-s, Occupation - Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar', Panchayai' Lakhalpur, Disf’r. Surguja (C G) 107/ Rarrlfal Vaclav, 5/0. Ram Sundar', aged about 31 year's, Occupation - Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur', Distt. Surguja (C G ) 11. (’Kamal Sai, 5/0. late Shri Bir Sai, aged about 38 year‘s, Occupation — Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (CG) fi/HRa-m-ratan Dds, S/o. Late Jaipal Dos, aged about 45 years, Occupation = Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (6.6.) 13f Devmun, S/o. Fonoram, aged about 34 years, Occupation — Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) 14¢? Meghnath Ram, S/o. late Shri Sigan Ram, aged about 4O years, Occupation - Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (CO) 15. Dmp Kumar, 5/0. Kush Nam @ Patel, aged about 26 years, Occupation : Workingit‘as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchayat Lakhatpur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.) /x x 16. .Shiv Nath, 5/0. ‘Ia’re Shri Lufharu, aged about 45 year's, Occupation : Working as Daily Wages employee, Nagar, Panchaym‘ Lakhafpur‘, Dish‘. Surguja (C.G.) VERSUS 1. “(We S‘mfe of Chhaf‘risgar'h, Through The Principal 4’ Secre’mr‘y, DeparTmenf of Urban Administration and Development, Mam‘mlaya a? D.K.5. Bhawan, Raipur‘ (CG). RESPONDENTS : /. Under 2. The Department Secre’rary, of Urban Administration and Development, Mantralaya at D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 3. ’/Nagar Panchaya’r Lakhanpur, Distt. Surguja. Through its Chief Municipal Officer, Bhatgaon, (C.G.) f. 4. The Chief Municipal Officer, Nagar Panchayat Lakhanpur, Dist. Surguja (6.6.) 5. The President, Nagar Panchayat Lakhanpur, Distt. Surguja (C.6.) ‘ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS: As stated in the cause title above. PARTICULARS OF THE kESPONDENTs: V As stated in the cause title above. 2. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 6710 0f2010 PETITIONERS : Su'shilBharti&Others. , VERSUS SPONDENTS : The State ofChhamsgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF W SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. INDIA Present: Shn' Shashank Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent No. 1&2. Shm' Shrijith C.S.Nair, Advocate for the respondent No. 3 to 5. 3 ORDER ORAL , _ (Passed on 17 day of February,2011) At the very outset, 1eamed counsel appearing for the parties jointly and fairly submit that the issue involved in the present petition as well as in Dham‘mm & Others v. State ofChhattisgarh & Othersl which was considered and decided by this Comt on 20.01.2011, are identical. Thereafter, the said issue was re-eonsidered in Virena‘ra Das Manikpuri & Others v. The State ofChhamsgarh & Othersz, by this Court on 10.02.201 l. Thus, the instant petition is squarely covered by the orders passed by this court inDhcmiram & Othersj and Wrendra Das Manikpuri r52 Others]. 2. In View of the submission made by learned counsel appearing for the parties, this petition is disposed of in terms ofthe orderspassed in Dhaniram & Othersf and Virermlra Das Manikpuri & Othersz. Sd/~ Satish K. Agnihovtri ~i Judge Amit JV t 7' 3' y, ‘ w.P.(§) No. 679s of 2010, decided on 20.01 .2011 ‘ 2 W.P.(S) No. 7450 of20I0 , decided on 10.02.2011 \ ,RE