Chhattisgarh High Court
WP/7160/2006 of BHAKU LAL KANWAR Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ANR. on 22 December 2006
(2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N07160 /2oos PETITIONER /Bhaku LalKanwar S/oShriNankiMangalu Age about 43 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Sundareli, Block - Sakti, Distt. - Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS State Government of Chhattisgarh Through
a F1 , 6 2 %
I N T H EH I G HC O U R TO FC H H A T T I S G A R HA TB I L A S P U R
W R I TP E T I T I O N( S )[N 0 7 1 6 0]/ 2 o o s P E T I T I O N E R‘g o ‘ f /:"
L a l K a n w a r
/ B h a k u
S / o S h r i N a n k i M a n g a l uA g ea b o u t 4 3y e a r s ,[A s s i s t a n t]T e a c h e r , G o v t .P r i m a r y S c h o o l ,S u n d a r e l i , B l o c k- S a k t i ,D i s t t .- J a n j g i r - C h a m p a( C . G . )
V E R S U S
S t a t e G o v e r n m e n to f C h h a t t i s g a r h T h r o u g h: - S e c r e t a r y , E d u c a t i o n D e p a r t m e n t , D . K . S . B h a w a n ,R a i p u r ( C . G . ) ( C . G . )
D i s t r i c t E d u c a t i o nO f f i c e r J a n j g i r - C h a m p a ( C . G . )
W R I TP E T I T I O NU N D E RA R T I C L E2 2 ( 6 / O F T H EC O N S T I T U T I O NO FI N D I A
HI6H COURT HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR
W. P.fSl No. 69^ of 2006
Petitioner :Ramesh Kumar TripathiVersusVersusRespondents :State 6cvt. of Chhattisgarh ondanotheranother
W. P.fS)No. 7156 of 2006
Petitioner :Manbodh Ram Kanwur
Versus
Respondents :State 6ovt. of Chhattisyirh andothersothers
W. P.fS) No. 7157 of 2006
Petitioner :Konwl Prasad Paikara
Versus
Respondents :State 6ovt. of Chh<(ttisgarh ando-therso-thers
W. P.(S) No. 71S8 of 2006
Petitioner :Rajendra Kumar Rathore
Versus
Respondents ;State 6ovt. of Chhatti^arh ondothersothers
W. P fS) No. 7159 of 2006
Petitioner :Dhaja Ram Ldiare
Versus
Re^iondents :Stnrte 6ovt. of Chhatt'isgoa'h cndarwtherarwther
W. P.fS) No. 7160 of 2006
Petitioner :Ghaku Lal KtawwVersusVersusRespondents :State 6ovt. of ChhorM'isgorh andonolheronolher
W. P.fS)No. 7161 of 2006
Petitioner :Chhedi Lal Paikara
Versus
Respondents :State 6ovt. of Chhattis9arh andanotheranother
W. P.fS) No. 7162 of 2006
Bund Ram Paikora
Petitioner ;
Verais
Respondents ;State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh andano'therano'ther
W. P.(S) No. 7163 of 2006
Petitioner :Mohon ftam Netam
Versus
Respondents :Stort-e 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh andothersothers
Page 1 of 3
W. P.fS) No. 7164 of 2006
Petitioner :Ku. Suraj Sori
Versus
Respondents :State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarfi ando'therso'thers
W. P.(S) No. 7165 of 2006
Petitwner :Jagbandhu Samra-th
Versus
Respondents :Stnte 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh endothersothers
W. P.fS) No. 7166 of 2006
Petitioner ;Amrit Lal Sahu
Versus
Respondents ;State 6ovt. of Chhatt'isgou4i and o'thers
W. P.fS) No. 7167 of 2006
Petitioner ;Mohd. Hamid Hoinif
Verajs
Respondents :State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh and ——
others ——-—
Page 2 of 3
Subhadt
And
W. P.fS) No. 7168 of 2006
Petitioner :Rohit Ram AAahuveer
Versus
Stofte Sovt.of Chhatti^arh andothersothers Kespondents :
SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J
Present:Mr. Ajay Shrivastnva, counsel for the petitioner(s). petitioner(s).
AAr. Arun Sao, Sovemment Advocate for State/respondents.
ORDER
(Possed[on][ -this][ 22'"'][ day][ of][ Ctecember,][ 2006)]
The following order of 1+ie Court is passed by Satish K. Agnihotri. J.
1. Learned counsel appearin9 for the petitioners as well as for theState/respondents jointly submit that the facts of the present writpetition are similar to that of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (SudiilTiwari and others vs. State 6ovt. of Chhorttisgarh & olhers), whichWEIS allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit thut thequestion of law involved is also the same.State/respondents jointly submit that the facts of the present writpetition are similar to that of in W. P. (S) No. 5976/2006 (SudiilTiwari and others vs. State 6ovt. of Chhorttisgarh & olhers), whichWEIS allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They further submit thut thequestion of law involved is also the same.
2. In view of the above stated submissions made by teamect counsel for•the parties the writ petitions are altowed terms of -the order dated7.11.2006 passed by this Court in 5976/2006 (Su^iil Tiwari andothers vs. State 6ovt. of Chhatt'isgarh&. o'thers). No order as tocosts.•the parties the writ petitions are altowed terms of -the order dated7.11.2006 passed by this Court in 5976/2006 (Su^iil Tiwari andothers vs. State 6ovt. of Chhatt'isgarh&. o'thers). No order as tocosts.
3. A copy of this order be placed on record in connected matters.
Sd/-
Satish K. AgnihotriJudge
Page 3 of 3
Loading citations and judicial treatment…