HK3H COURT OFCHIWTTISOARH AT BLASPUR WRITPETmON(SljK3^7<rf;iafl5r PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Vinod Kumar Shanna, S/o Kasht Prasad Sharma, s^ed about36 ysars, R/o New Chandaniyapara, Janjgir (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of ChhatBsgarh, Through Secrrtary, EducaUon Department, D.K.S. Biawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. DirectDr of Public Insteuctton, Pensionbada, Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE GOhBTITUTION OF INDIA Single Bench : Hon'bte Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Mr. Kumaresh Tlwari, Advocate forthe patiUoner. Mr. Arvlnd Dvtoey, Panel lawyerforthe respondents/State. CTUXR (Passed on 13tn day of June,2007) Leamed counsel appearinB fw the petttioner as wstl as for the State/respondents jointly sutwnit that the fact arri questton of law invoh/ed in the present writ petHion are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal CorfwraNon, Durg and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}, which has been disposed of vide order dated 03.04.2006. Leamed counsel appwiring for the respondents does not controvert the said submissiwi. Accordingly, the wrtt petttion is allowed in terms ofthe eider passwl in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to vertfiG^iwi ofthe fact as to whether the petitfoner has acquired B.Ed. Examinatton Certiflcate on his own expenses as per the clreutars drted 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999 and fuifter whether he has been paid two ach^nce increments or not. No order as to costs. Bablu Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge r=