JINN^ 1 G62 ^r-^Q SINGLE BENCH IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(Sl N0.^ 31-3 /2009 (S.B.) PBTITIONERS .fi^ ^'^-••" ^.$y .^•y....-" ^•y ^ ^' '^B' ^ .^ 1. Amar Singh Patel, S/o Shri Jainand Patel, aged about 45 years, Head Master, Goyt. Janpad Primary School, Karra, Block / Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. Saman-i Ram Chauhan, S/o Premu Ram Chauhan, aged about 46 years, Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Koni, Block- Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) /" 3. Dilip Kumar Kaushik, S/o Shri Horilal Kaushik, aged about 41 years, Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Daihanpara (Karra) Block - Masturi, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2^ RESPONDENTS VERSUS ~7 !. • • • : 1. Stateof Chhattisgarh Through - Secretary School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ' District Education Officer, Bilaspur, Distt. -Bilapur (C.G.) 3. ^ Block Education Officer, Masturi, Block- Masturi, Distt.- Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLB 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. .^ HIGH COURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BJLASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 7313 of 2009 PETlTiONERS : Amar Singh Patel & Others. RESPONDENTS VERSUS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PET1TION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTiTUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'bte Shri Safeh K. Aanihotri. J. Present: Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Pankaj Shrivastava, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on 16th day of D^ember, 2009) 1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is heard finaily. 2. At the very outset, iearned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this petition is squarely covered by the decision of t'nis Court passed in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipaf Corporatfon, Durg and another' a^ Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofChhattJsgarhandanothei2 and prays thatsimiiar rellef may be granted in case of the present petitioners also. At this juncture, iearned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event the petitioners submit a detailed representation, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with iaw and in view of the decision of this Court rendered in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj QT\^ Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), subject to verification of the facte. in view offoregoing, according to learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, .nothing survives for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. | "- 3. 4. 5. \ 2006 (ii) MPJR CG 96 WP(S)No.4130of2005 Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge