Sumitra v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No.7117 of 2016

1. Sumitra daughter of late Janeshwar, aged about 32 years, working as Cook, Government Primary School, Sirsi Junapara, Block & Tahsil-Bhaiyathan, District-Surajpur (CG)

2. Smt. Sawango wife of Pran Sai, aged about 40 years, working as Cook, Government Middle School, Sirsi, Block & TahsilBhaiyathan, District-Surajpur (CG)

3. Fulkunwar daughter of Batu Ram, aged about 35 years, working as Cook, Government Primary School, Sirsi Sarnapara, Block & Tahsil-Bhaiyathan, District-Surajpur (CG)

4. Smt.Sundri Kushwaha wife of late Uruslal, aged about 30 years, working as Cook, Government Primary School, Sarnapara, Block & Tahsil-Bhaiyathan, District-Surajpur (CG) --- Petitioners

Versus

1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary, School Education Department, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur, District-Raipur (CG)

2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instructions, Pension Bada, Raipur (CG)

3. The Collector, Surajpur, District Surajpur (CG)

4. The District Education Officer, Surajpur (CG)

5. The Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat, Bhaiyathan, District Surajpur (CG)

6. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Human Resources Development Department of School Education and Literacy, Mid Day Meal Division, Shashtri Bhawan, New Delhi ---- Respondents ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioners :

Mr.Harish Khuntia, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 4 :

Mr.P.K.Bhaduri, G.A.

For Respondent No.6 :

Mr.R.K. Kesharwani, Advocate ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 10/1/2017

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that identical nature of writ petition has already been decided by this Court. One

such writ petition is WP(S) No.6430 of 2016, which was decided on 25.11.2016.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the fact that nature of relief sought for by the petitioners is similar to WP(S) No.6430 of 2016.

3. Accordingly, the present writ petition is also disposed of. The petitioners are directed to make the representations before respondent No.1, who in turn, shall consider the representations of the petitioners in the light of of judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of State of Punjab & Ors. Vs. Jagjit Singh & Ors., decided on 26th October, 2016 and shall pass an appropriate speaking order on its own merit as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the representations.

4. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands disposed of.

Sd/- S (P. Sam Koshy) Judge B/-