← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/1835/2017disposed off

Ramesh Kumar v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2017-04-19Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 1835 of 2017

1. Ramesh Kumar S/o Shri Panch Ram, Aged About 38 Years Working As Watchman At Head Office Of Samarbagh, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh.

2. Lilawati W/o Laxman Ram, Aged About 31 Years Working As Peon At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru Sanskrit H. S. School, Shrikot, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh).

3. Smt. Yashoda Bai W/o Shri Mahendra Kumar, Aged About 38 Years Presently Working As Cook At Pre Matric Girls Hostels 40 Seats Samarbagh, Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh) ( Daughter Of Wrongly Mentioned In Annexure P/1 ).

4. Jayant Yadav S/o Shri Kashi Yadav, Aged About 33 Years Presently Working As Peon At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru Sanskrit H. S. School, Shrikot, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj, (Chhattisgarh).

5. Dilranjan Ram S/o Shri Samrath Ram, Aged About 36 Years Presently Working As Watchman At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru H. S. Adiwasi Boys Hostels 50 Seats Tahsil Bagicha, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh).

6. Sunita W/o Shri Motilal, Aged About 31 Years Working As Peon At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru Sanskrit H. S. School, Shrikot, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur- Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh).

7. Vimal Ram S/o Sajan Ram, Aged About 37 Years Presently Working As Watchman At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru Sanskrit H. S. Hostel, Shrikot, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh).

8. Smt. Seema Pandey W/o Shri Dilip Kumar, Aged About 41 Years Presently Working As Peon At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru H. S. School Samabagh, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh).

9. Shri Ramgahan Yadav S/o Shri Devnarayan Yadav, Aged About 39 Years Presently Working As Watchman At Shri Rameshwar Gahira Guru H. S. Adiwasi Boys Hostels 60 Seats Samarbagh, Tahsil Kusmi, District Balrampur Ramanujganj (Chhattisgarh). ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary School Education Department Mantralaya Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

2. The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department Mantralaya Capital Complex, Mahanadi Bhawan Naya Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh).

3. Secretary of Sanatan Sant Samaj, Gahira Guru Head Office Samarbar, Post Durgapara, District Jashpur (Chhattisgarh).

4. Director of The Education Department, Mantralaya Capital Complex Indrawati Bhawan Naya Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh). ---- Respondents For Petitioners :

Shri AK Yadav, Advocate For Respondents-State :

Shri SP Kale, Dy. AG for the State Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 19/04/2017

1. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the subject matter of the writ petition is squarely covered by judgment passed by this Court in the matter of Narayan Shrivastava and others Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others {W.P. No. 56 of 2000} decided on 12th April, 2007. He would submit that the present writ petition may be disposed of in the same terms.

2. Learned State counsel would submit that the petitioners may submit a representation and the competent authority shall examine the issue and if their case is similar to Narayan Shrivastava (supra), and the said order is still intact, their case may be considered in accordance with law.

3. In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction that in the event petitioners prefer representations before the competent authority seeking relief

on the ground of parity with the case of Narayan Shrivastava (supra) within a period of one month from today, the competent authority shall examine the matter and decide the representation by speaking order as early as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of submission of representations. In the event the competent authority decides the representation against the petitioners they would be at liberty to move afresh before this Court. Sd/- Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Ashu