<y /^2— IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR "s^^/. W.P. (S) N0. PETITIONER ^f" ^••**t"A^**' . ^^- ,^'^>'" /2011 Chandra Shekhar Chaudhary S/o Late Bali Ram Chaudhary, Aged about 40 years, Upper Division Teacher, Middle School Maharatola, Block- Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham- (C.G.) 9<^ ^-^ VER8US RESPQNDENTS 1. r State of Chhattisgarh through w Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2.r The District Education officer, Distt.Kabirdham- (C.G.) •^•" 3. ' Block Education officer, Bodla, Distt.Kabirdham- (C.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^^^ HIOH COURT OP CHHATTISQARB AT Bjy^SPUR SB : HQM»BLBMR. JUSTICB PRITINKBR DIWAKER PBTITIONER RBSPONDBNTs W.P.j(81,|rO.A822Z201l Chandra Chaudhaiy Shekhar yex^us State of Chhattisgarh & Ofhers Shri Deepak Jaia, connsel for fhe petitioner. Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for fhp State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLK 226 OP THB COMSTITUTKMM OP INDIA ORDBR (18.07.2011) The petitioner, who was appoiated 0x1 €he post of Assistemt Teacher zuider fhe School Education Department on 16.5.96 (Aiinexure P/1) is aggrieved by the action of the respondents fai not adding two advance iacrements in his salary even fhoiigh he did his D.Ed. JBnoxn C,G. Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal^ Raipiir at hia owa cost in the year 2006 after seekiag permission for fhe same from fhe department. Counsel for fhe petitioner subnilts that the petitioner is entifled for two advaace incremente as he had obtamed D,Ed Exammation certificate, in accordaace witlx ffae proviaions of Circiilar dated 24.12.98 aad ia view of tibLe judgments of Hon'ble Sixpreme Court m the xaatter of State of M»P, & Anofher Vs. BadriBarayaa Acharya and otbers reported in 1996 SC 2779 aad Yashwfait Kuaaar Bhardwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Dxirg aod anofher reported ia 2006 (II) MRJER 96 (CG). On fhe ofher hand, couxisel for tfae State submits that erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide circular dated 22,10,1964 allowed advance iacrements oiily to fhose goverament servaxite who pioceeded for traming up to 22.10.1964 whefher at his own cost or at fhe govemment cost However^ who proceeded OB tramdxi^ on or after 23.10.1964 can get two aanual iiicrements oaily if tlie traming is at • -^. '•% l' v '^y his cost aad not at fhe cost ofthe GoverctmeBt TUa circular ofdated 23.10.1964 was superceded vide oider dated 10.12.1975. The Govenuxient vide nott&catioa dated 16.6.1973 aisiended M.P, Non- Ga^ette Class-II Educational Services (Non-college Services) Recruitmeut and Promotion Rules, 1993 added quali&catiloD of B.TJ. or B,Ed degree for appoiatment on the post ofAssisteiit Teacher. The petitioner woiild be entitled for advance incremente oiily ia the condition fhat he had obtaiaed his B.T.l/B/Ed./BTL degree at Ns own cost during sendce after obtamiag penntesioii form tlie depariment belween 23.10.1964 to 1.3.99. To clarfcfy fhe above positiony eirculars ha^e already been issued OB 6,2,2007 and cxa 30.1.09. Facts^ as detailed above^ are not ia dispute, This Court ia the snatter of Yashwaat Kusnar Bhaiadwaj (supra) elabo^atefy disciissiog fhe circulars dated 24-12.98, 1.3-99 aad relying upoii fhe judgment of fhe Hon^ble Apex Court ia fhe matter of Badrmarayaa Achaiya's case (supra) has held fliat teachers^ not assistant teacfaers alone, woiild be entifled to two advance incremeaits 011 obtami&g B,Bd examiixation certificate after 22.10,1964^ as fhe c&rcular dated 22.10/1964 does not prescribe any outer limit of fhe period of obtammg B.Edy M.Ed & B.TJ. certificate. It has been further held that circular dated 1,3,99 is applicable to oisly Assiatant Teaohers (LDT) and not to other teachers (UDT). Shri Daa fairly submits fhat priaciple of law laid dowa m Yashwant Kuiaar Bharadwaj>s case (supra) hae attamed fiaality aisd case of fhe petitioner m tfais petition is also squarely ccwered by tfae above jzidgment as also cwcnlar dated 24.12.1998» For the aforesaid reasons., the petitiotier is entitled to the payment of two ad^raiice mcrexsients from fhe date of de^laration of fhe petitioiier>s D»Ed< examiaation result The respoiideiits are accordingly dirccted to sxiake payment of two advauce iaciemeiits to the petitioner from the date ofhis passmg D<Ed, exammation, within a period of four months fix>m today, However, this orfer slxall be subject to aU verifications made by fhe State regardiog facte pleaded ia fhe petition. No order as to costs. Sd/- PritinkerDiwaker Judge