High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPC/1848/2016disposed off

Dr. Vandana Dakaha v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2016-07-26Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 1848 of 2016 • Dr. Vandana Dakaha D/o Shri B.L. Chhadile, Aged About 36 Years R/o Ravidas Nagar, Brahmadev, Colony Bilaspur Tehsil & District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Health & Family, Zero Point, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralay, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Naya Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Secretary, Department Of Finance Government Of Chhattisgarh Mahanadi Bhawan, New Mantralaya, P.S. Mandir Hasaud, Naya Raipur Chhattisgarh

3. The Director, Ayurvedi Yog & Prakritik Chiktsa Unani Siddha & Momeopathy Ayush Chhattisgarh Raipur Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Petitioner Shri R. K. Dubey, Advocate For Respondent-State Shri Shashank Thakur, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 26/07/2016 1.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the grievance raised in the writ petition is squarely covered by an order passed by this Court in WPC No.2278/2014 (Heera Chand Patel v. State of Chhattisgarh) and other connected matters, decided on 27.11.2014. 2.

Learned counsel would submit that the representation preferred by the above said petitioners is pending consideration, therefore, this petition may also be disposed of in the same terms.

Considering the entire facts situation of the case, the present writ petition is also disposed of in terms of para 8 of the order passed in WPC No.2278/2014 and other connected matters, which is reproduced hereinunder:- 8.

Considering the entirety of the circumstances and particularly the spirit of the order passed by this Court in the matters of Manish Kumar Patel and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others in WPC No.1646/2012, WPC No.955/2014 and Dr. Ankita Choubey v. State of Chhattisgarh in WPC No.859/2014, these writ petitions are disposed of with a direction that in the event any other students of Post Graduate (Ayurvedic Medicine) has been granted stipend for a period prior to coming into force of Regulation, 2012, the petitioners shall also be paid the stipend equal to the rate at which student of Post Graduate (Allopathy Medicine) has been granted. In the event any adverse order is passed, the petitioners would be at liberty to move again before this Court." 4.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- JUDGE PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA Nirala