Yogendra Kumar Maravi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 532 of 2016

1. Yogendra Kumar Maravi S/o Late Shri B. S. Maravi, Aged About 50 Years Occupation Subedar ( M ) Working Under The 13th B N C A F Bango, District Korba, Chhattisgarh.

2. Madan Lal Shukla S/o Late Rajnath Shukla, Aged About 51 Years Occupation Sub Inspector (M) Working Under The Office Of Superintendent Of Police Balod Chhattisgarh.

3. S. R. Khan, S/o Late Shri Gulab Khan, Aged About 60 Years Occupation Inspector (M) Working Under The Office Of Superintendent Of Police Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through its Secretary, Department Of Home And Police Affairs, Secretariat, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, P. S. And Post Rakhi, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Civil Line, P. S. Civil Line, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. Inspector General Of Police, Office Of The Inspector General Of Police Bilaspur Range, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

4. Inspector General Of Police, Office Of The Inspector General Of Police Durg Range, Durg, Chhattisgarh.

5. The Secretary Finance, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

6. I G C A F Police Head Quarter, Civil Line, P. S. Civil Line, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

7. The Director ( Treasury, Audit And Accounts ) Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

---- Respondents For Petitioners : Shri Badruddin Khan, Advocate For Respondents/State : Shri Arun Sao, Dy. Advocate General. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order On Board

19/02/2016 Heard.

(1) At the outset, learned counsel for the parties would fairly submit that the issue involved in the present writ petition has already been decided by this Court in WP(S) No.6698/2014 {Rammani Tripathi Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & others} on 24.12.2014, filed as Annexure-P/4 and the present writ petition may also be disposed of in similar terms. (2) Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of in terms of the order passed in WP(S) No.6698/2014. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the respondents would be at liberty to decide the representation strictly in accordance with law.

Sd/- (Sanjay K. Agrawal) Judge D/-