High Court Of ChhattisgarhWPS/113/2013withdrawn

Ram Suhavan Loniya And ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS.

2015-07-30Hon'Ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 113 of 2013

1. Ram Suhavan Loniya S/o Shri Ramsanehi Loniya Aged About 30 years R/o Gram- Navrangpur, Post Ramhepur, Thana & Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli

2. Vikas Kumar Loniya S/o Shri Khemraj Loniya Aged About 24 Years R/o Gram- Navrangpur, Post Ramhepur, Thana & Tehsil Lormi, District Mungeli

3. Ramdatt Sahu S/o Shri Bhikharilal Sahu Aged About 27 Years R/o Anjori Patel Bhawan Bharat Chowk, Chingraj Para Ward No. 41, Thana Sarknada Bilaspur (CG)

4. Nohar Singh Rawat S/o Chaitram Rawat Aged About 27 Years R/o village Lapti, Post Nawadih, Thana & Tahsil Lormi, District Mungeli C.G.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Principal Secretary, Panchayat & Rural Development Department, Mantralaya, DKS Bhawan Raipur C.G.

2. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Panchayat, Bilaspur C.G.

3. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat, Bilha, Dist. Bilaspur C.G.

4. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchyat, Masturi Dist. Bilaspur C.G.

5. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Kota, Bilaspur C.G.

6. Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Takhatpur, Bilapsur C.G.

7. Chief Executive Officer., Janpad Panchyat Gorela Bilaspur C.G.

8. Chief Executive Officer, Janapad Panchayt. Pendra Bilaspur C.G.

9. Chief Executive Officer., Janpad Panchayat, Marwahi Bilaspur C.G. 10.Chief Executive Officer. Janapad Panchayat, Lormi Mungeli C.G. 11.Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Pathria Mungeli C.G.

12.Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Mungeli C.G. ---- Respondent For Petitioners : Shri Mateen Siddiqui, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Shri YS Thakur, Deputy AG with Shri Bhaskar Payashi, Panel Lawyer Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Order On Board 30/07/2015

1. In view of the amendment incorporated in the Chhattisgarh Teachers (Panchayat) Cadre (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2012 with effect from 19.11.2012, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission of the Court to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to prefer a fresh petition challenging vires of the amendment.

2. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid.

Sd/- Judge (Prashant Kumar Mishra) Barve