Narendra Prasad Rathore And ORS v. State Of Chhattisgarh And ORS
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
^ INTHE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.i Writ Petition (S| No. 4/^^ of2013 :1 Narendra Prasad Rathore son of Shri Ramlal Rathore, aged about 60 ears, resident of Village Post-Portha, ^ Police Station-Sakti, District-Janjgir- ,Y\V ^^•s l^tt-.^^--u ^^ ^< ^- Champa (C.G.) ..»•••'
Ramsai Ijardar son of Ghurau Ijardar, aged about 61,1/2 years, resident of Sakti, Police Station-Sakti, DistrictJanjgir-Champa (C.G.) Puniram Yadav son of Seukram Yadav, aged about 52 years, resident ,-"t of Village & Post-Ragja, Police Station- ^•v»\* Sakti, District-Jaajgir-Champa (C.G,) Laxini Prasad Sahu son of late Shri Gesram Sahu, aged about 52 years, resident of Village and Post-Ragja, Police Station-Sakti, District-JanjgirChampa (C.G.) s.
Sakhiram Yadav son of Banshiram Yadav, aged about years, resident of Village and PostRagja, Police Station-Sakti, ©istrictJanjgir-Champa (C.G.) Maharathi Yadav son of Shri Bisahuram Yadav, aged about 6.
years, resident of Village and Post-
(S> Jajang, Police Station-Sakti, DistrictJanjgir-Champa (C.G.)
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS : 1. State of Chhattisgarh :
Through the Secretary, Departraent of Higher Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, New Raipur (C.G.) The Director, Higher Education, Raipur (C.G.) 3.
The Principal, Jawaharlal Nehru Degree College, Sakti, District-JanjgirChampa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA -<t>
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR SLNGLE_BENCH_ :
HON'BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR M^ISHRA, J.
W.P.(S)No.4196of2013 PETITIONERS Narendra Prasad Rathore and others.
Versus
RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh and others.
Shri B.P. Singh, counsel for petitioners.
Shri Rakesh Jha, Govt. Advocate for the State, on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (01/01/2014) Learned counsel for the petitioners wbuld 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 in W.P. No. 56 of 2000'decided on 12th April, 2007. He would submit that the present writ petition is disposed of in the same terms.
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 Shhvastava and others Vs. Stete of Chhattisgarh and others (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 prefers a representation before the competent authority seeking relief on the ground of parity with the case of Narayan Shrivastava and others Vs. State ofChhattisgarh and others (supra) within a perjod of one month from today, the competent authority shall examine the matter and decidejil the representation by speaking order as early as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the date of submission of representation in the event the competeRt authority shall decide the representation against the petitioners they would be at liberty to move afresh before this Court. Sd//- prashantKumar Judge Mtebra '\- •^