s:T ili'i3L£EEMCI'! c>^ 'yz? W THE mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARHAT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) N0. / 2-/ /20Qfe^- WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER \^w ^-®" <^N~' \wC->^!%'" yo?y' «<*• iflESPONDENTS 1. l^ ^--Sanjay Kumar Sinha, aged about 42 years, son of Late Dwarika Prasad Sinha, Assistant Teacher, Govemment Primary School Turiloram, Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through - Seeretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) .y «1?1"V&v . t") ^ Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) '£Ja"^'. a(Y\1^ ^. fn 1.k/dz''-»fl.NS-Y'UB 2., The District Education Officer, Distt. ^o ft- °'°"' //' Jashpur (C.G.) PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER As per cause title. c^^ 01. HMH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P.fS) No. 117 of 2007 Petitioners : Monsingh Khande ond others Versus Re^»ondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh and o'thers W. P.fSINo. 118 of 2007 Petitioners : Tejnun 090! ond o-thers Versus Respondents : State of ChhattiS9arh ond others W. P.(S\ No. 121 of 2007 Petitioner : Sonjay Kumar Sinha Versus Re^iondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and onother W. P.(S\ No. 126 of 2007 Petitioner : Bhuvneshwar Prasad Pradhon Versus Respondents : Stote of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.fS) No. 127 of 2007 Petitioner : Kulronjan Ekka Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and others W.P.fS^No. 128 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Bharti Bai Versus Respondents : State of Chhanisgarh and another W. P(S\ No. 129 of 2007 Petitioner : Philos Akshoy Mukut Tig9a Versus fte^»ondents : State of Chhatt'isgarh ond another W. P.(S\ No. 130 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Prosadi 090! Versus Respondents : State of ChhcEttisgarh and dno-ther W. P.fSl No. 131 of 2007 Petitioner : Sa9ar Sai Versus Respondents : State of ChhcrttiS9arh and olhers W. P.fSl No. 133 of 2007 Petitioner : Inus Bek Versus Respondents ; Slute of Chhattis9arh ond ano-ther W. P.(S\ No. 134 of 2007 Petitioner : Batiram Bhagat Versus Kespondents : State of ChhottiS9arh and another W. P.fS) No. 135 of 2007 Petitioner : Avinash Chondra Xalco Versus Respondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh and others W. P.(S) No. 136 of 2007 Petitioner ; Smt. Shashikala Bhagat Versus Req»ondents : State of Chhattisgarh and ano-ther W. P.(S\ No. 137 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhanduram Bhagat Versus Respondentd : Stotte of Chhartisgarh ond another W. P.(S) No. 139 of 20)7 Petitioner : Ku. Clementina 71990 Versus Respondents : State of Chhatl-isgarh wd anotiier W. P.fS) No. 145 of 2007 Petitioner ; Krishna Ram Patel Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh and others W. P.fSl No. 147 of 2007 Petitioner : Laxmimrayan Patel Versus Kespondents : State of Chhatt-i^arh ond ono'ther W. P.fS) No. 149 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. AAaxi Miliyani Toppo Versus Respondents ; State of Chhdrttisgarh ond another W. P.(S) No. 150 of 2007 Petitioner : Smt. Rajnwni Versus Req»ondents : State of Chhattisgarh and others W. P.(S) No. 151 of 2007 Petitioner : Chamru Ram Na9deo Versus ftespondents : State of Chhatti^arh and others W. P.(S) No. 159 of 2007 Petitioner : Saneah Ram Pradhan Versus Respondents ; State of Chhatt-iqarh and another W. P.(S) No. 161 of 2007 Petitioner : Chhotelat Khcaww Versus Respondents : State of Chhaftisgarh and another W. P.(S) No. 165 of 2007 Petitioner : Ramkumar Choudhari Verajs Rayondents : State of Chhattisgarh ond onother And W. P.fS) No. 168 of 2007 Petitioner ; Brijmohan Nayak Versus Re^wndents : State of Chhattisgarh ond onother ^^^^^-^.^-^^^i.^s^^^i—HBeS"! %r i^1-T" ?"^J':''^ ^3 SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihutri. J Present: Mr. A.N. Bhaklu, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mrs. Anju Ahuju, Oeputy Swemment Advocate, Mr. Arvind Dubey. Panel Lawyer, Ms. Sunita Jain, Ponel Lowyer for the respondents/State. ORDER (Passed on Ihis 17th Duy of Jonuary, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the Sta'te/respondents jointly submit Ihfft •the facts of the present writ petitions ure similar to that of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari and o-thers vs. Stute Sovemment of Chhatl'isgarh & olhers), which was atlowed vide order dated 7.1i.2006. They further submit Ihat the question of ku»involved is also -the same. 2. In view of the ubove-started submissions made by leamed counsel for the parties, -these writ petitions are allowed in lerms of Kie order dated 7.11.Z006 passed by -this Court in WJ>. (S.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Thwari and o-t+iers vs. State Sovernment of ChhattiS9arh & o-thers). No order as to costs. Subhash 3. A copy of •this order be ploced on record in other connected writ petttion. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge