a?” %L~ PETITIONER $§§§§ELE $E§WH IN THE HoN'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATrIssARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) WRIT PETITION (S) No. Qwy OF 2010 Nonkar Prasad Jaiswal Son of Late Shri Radhelal Jaiswal, aged about 34 years, Working as an Upper Division Teacher, Middle School, Sakrelikaia, Block Sakti, District Janjgir—Champa (C.G.). VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through: the Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The Under Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The Director, Public Instructions, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.). The District Education Officer, District Janjgir—Champa \9‘ ; g3 RESPONDENTS Janjgir, (C.G.). The Block Education Officer Sakti, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER A5 given in the cause title. l a WW(W) petition is no longer res inlegva g decided by the Hon’ble Suprexm Saxena Vs. State of NLP. B5 Grs. It is furthsr submitted tha simiiar View 1'11 itS ord€r dated ’6 6257] 2008. Counsei for ths petit ordar dat€d 29.4.2010 passed 1'1 wherein relying upon the judgmer case of Asha Saxena {supra} 311d 11d the: sams has been fmajiy t Com in the case of Asha 2009 (HIEMPJR (Sq 59. 1. this Court has also taken a 2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. Loner further submits that the L» Wn't Appeal No‘ 124f2009, i 1t of the Supreme Court in fhe ' e order passed by this Com in another Wn’t Appeal No. 8 [2009, directions have been issueti for consideration of the ,ase for grant of two advance increments as per circular dated 21.9. 1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verifica ion of the facts pieaded in the petition . Counsel for the State su would aiso be considered on The . ts that case of the petitioners ame lines i b mm 1112a 31m 3mm? emf? § fee”? W11 a?W 3W2?! $3 : HGN’BLE MR. JUST!CE PRI‘NNKER DIWAKER 2’3‘1G.2010 Shri V.K.Pamiey, counsel fo f the petitioner. Shn' Vivek Shanna. RL‘ for {he State. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is enfitled to benefit of two advance increments on account of he having passed D.Ed. examination! before his appointment at his own cost. it is submitted that the issue involved in the present WW F‘L . mm (We) WWW?! WW wm $Wm In View of above, m6 patition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent authogities to decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advanice increments as per circular d . ated 21.9.1974 issued by the S verincation of the facts pleaded in eight weeks from today. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the same stn‘ctly in accordance with law. Sd/- » Pritinker Diwaker hate of Madhya Pradesh after the petition Within a period of I Judge . ......wrewwwe g: