Allowed

Kulu Ram Kashyap and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC5 Feb 2007WPS/653/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single-judge bench allowed an identical writ petition by treating it as involving facts and legal questions similar to a previously decided order dated 7.11.2006 in W. P. No. 5976 of 2006. The petitioners are teachers from the Tribal Department.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed in terms of the order dated 7.11.2006 passed in W.P. No. 5976 of 2006.

Kulu Ram Kashyap and Ors. Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Chhattisgarh HC (2007)

¶1

61^^{"~S^r^} ^__§ii^Ui ;!i, •^{-.^^} ii

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR_(CJ&.I

¶3

(''<' W.P. No....,..^..^.^,..,../20p7

¶4

PETITIONERS:

¶5

.••'\i?^
,/!^ /
^-i(L^'./
^••"'J<s'0.'
"Mx'
/^^
.-y^y
^"
»'•'
.r^•^T<'
G"<1'<,
)<';^>

¶6

^-17^{KuluRamKashyapS/oShriMaansai} Kashyap, Aged 38 year's Working as Asst. Teacher (Tribal Department) at Govt. Primary School, Sargipal, R/o Village-Post Karidgaon , Bakawand Distt. Bastar (C.G.)

¶7

2^ Smt. Gurmeet Thakur W/o Shree Laxinan Singh Thakur Aged 40 years, Working as Asst. Teacher atPriraary School Kumharpara, R/o Village-Post Revavand, Dist. Bastar.

¶8

Smt. Poonam Pataayak W/o shri^Suresh Kumar Pataiayak, Aged 43 years, working as Asst. Teacher at Primary School Kosradongri, R/o Pahurvel, Jagdalpur

Dist. Bastar

VERSUS

RESPONDENTS

State of Chhattisgarh through^the

¶13

Secretaiy Tribal Department^D.K.S.

¶14

Bhawan, Mantralaya, Raipur

(Chhattisgarh)

'^~' .*•

Asst. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare -'^

¶19

Departa&^lt, Jagdalpur Dist. BastarfC.G.) ^•f.

¶20

Commissioner, Raipur (C.G.)

¶21

PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OR THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI ETC. OR DIRECTION/ORDER OF LIKE NTURE

¶22

ETC:-

¶23

HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR

¶24

W. P. No. 653 of 2007

¶25

Petitioners : Kulu Ram Kashyap and others

¶26

Versus

¶27

Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and others

¶28

SB: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. J

¶29

Present:

¶30

r. Manoj Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶31

lAs. Sunita Jain, Panel Lawyer for the respondents/State.

¶32

OR DER

¶33

(Passed on this 5rt Doiy of February, 2007)

¶34

Leamed counse\ appearing for the petitioners as well as for tiie State/respondents jointly submit that the facts of the present writ petition are similar to that of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiuwri caid others vs. State Sovemment of Chhattisgarh & others), which was allowed vide order dated 7.11.2006. They fur-ther submit that the question of law involved is also the same.

¶35

In view of the above-stated submissions made by learned counselfor the parties, the writ petition is allowed in terms of -the order dated 7.11.2006 passed by this Court in W.P. (5.) No. 5976/2006 (Sushil Tiwari cmd others vs. State Sovernment of Chhattisgarh <& ol+iers). No order as to costs.

¶36

ThakUr

¶37

Sd/SatishK. Agnihotri Judge

¶38

Kulu Ram Kashyap and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kulu Ram Kashyap and Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Govind Narayan Paikra and Ors. Vs State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Smt. Indira Bai Sahu Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Santu Ram Markam Vs Sarpanch Gram Panchayat and Ors.

Smt.Savita Sharma Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Others

Smt. Asha Sharma and Ors. Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Gopal Ram Verma and 4 Others Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.