^-^s~6&7 JN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISHGARH ATBILASPUR (C.G.) W.P. (S) No. ^ 3 ^3 / 2009 Petitioner^ ^ f'S^ . :v ^.^ ^/^. ffj¥ ^L ^ ^ •fc..< ^ •'^ \!^ ;JVf / - . .. 1. Smt. Uma Manikpuri, Aged 46 years W/o Shri Tikam Das Manikpuri Asst. Teacher Tilak Primary School No. 2 Durg ( C. G. ) { 2. Rakesh kumar Chandrakar ,Aged 40 Years S/o Shri Ratan Lal Chandrakar Head Master Tilak Primary School No. 2 Shikshak Nagar, Durg ( C.G.) 3. Kailash Kumar Dewangan, Aged 32 years S/o Late Shri Mukendi Lal Dewangan Asst. Teacher Girls Primary School No. 1 Titurdhi Durg ( C. G. ) <4.Mahesh Ram Sahu ,Aged 47 Years S/o Shri MohanLaI Sahu Head Master Govt. Primary School, Paperchadi Rasmada Durg Distt. Durg ( C. G.) 5. Vinod Kumar Sharma, Aged 49 Years S/o Shri Tika Ram Sharma Head Master Primary School Boregoan, Durg ( C. G. ) Versus Respondents Cf ^ .,1 f ^ v ' '^\ ^ -^/ 1. State Government of Chhattishgarh, ThroughtheSecretary, School Education Department Ministry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer, District Durg (C.G.) w^" 3. Block Education Officet; Durg ( C. G. ) ^R1._PEimON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION ^ IND1^ EOR ISSUANCEOFWRIT'OF MANDAMUS /DIRECTJON OR APPROPRIPATEWRIT — — ^-^' <^ HIGH COURTQFCHHATTjSGARH:BILASPUR PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 7329 OF 2009 Smt. Uma Manikpuri & Othere Versus State Government of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioners. Shri N.N. Roy, Panel Lawyer for the State. ORDERrORAL) (Passed on this 16"' day of December. 2009) 1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing fw ttie parties, the petitlon is heard finally. 2. At the very outset, tearned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that this petition is squarely covered by the decision of this Court passed in W.P. (S) No.692 of 2007 (Ksirmo Dhurwe v. The State Government of Chhattisgarh & Another) and W.P. (S) No.367 of 2009 (Uma Ambast v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) and prays that similar relief may be granted in ca^ of ttie present petitionere also. 3. At this juncture, leamed counsel appearing for the State submtts that inthe event the petitioners submit a detailed representation the same shali be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in view of the decision of ttiis Court rendered In Ksirmo Dhurwe (supra) and Uma Ambast (supra), subject to verification of facts. 4. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counset appearing for the petitioners nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 5. Accordingly, the writ petition Is disposed of. _^___ Gowri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge