F a IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S! Nagg 0/2007 Wanohar Lal Chandrakar PETITIONER S/o Shrl Nathu Ram Chandrakar \>\ 51 ’¥ Age about 39 years Asstt Teacher K‘)’ \ Govt Naween Primary School Parsada Block - Arang, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS I : (1. State ofChhattisgarh 33?; Through :— Secretary, x13» \l 6‘ \\ ( e¢3$ School Education Department, Mantralaya at D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instruction, Pensionbada, Raipur (C.G.) / 3. District Education Officer District Education Office, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer Block - Arang, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) // WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitioner most humbly submit as under :- 1. Particulars of the Petitioner :- As mentioned in cause title, fauy' w 4;? y AQ x HIGH COURT OF CHHA! !ISGARH AT BILASPUR SI H : ’ TI wan PETmoNmW 9F m1 Petitionef : Yodhan sinoh Dewangan W'sw @pgnden$ : sate of Chhaw'sgarh and otters AM WRIT Pamlou (5.) No. 390 OF 2007 Petitioner : Manohar La! Chandrakal' ’ was Re§pon¢em : sate of Chhanisgarh and omen Pre§ent : Mr. Rakesh Anmony. counsel for ma potthonels Mr. Atvind Dubey, Panel lawyerfor the State! tespondents. \ (Passed on 23A Day of Januory. 2007) Leamod counsel appearing for the peanonors as also tor the State/respondems jolnuy submit that tho facts and question of law involved in the present writ pedtions'are squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the ease of Yashwant Kumar Bharedwaj vs. Municipal Corporedon, Dury and another‘ . 2. ln subsequent oases. i.e., Writ Petition (8.) No.5862 o f zoos (Hanan: Kumar Vismak5m vs. state or amauwam and others) and other connected matters. decided by this Court on 12-1 2- 2006. pursuant to the memo dated 28—1-1995. issued by die Secremy. Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospecuJs of Diploma in Educadon Examination. it was clarified that die nomenclature of the Basic Training Institute, i.e_., B.T.l. has been changed and renamed as N Dimoma in Education. i.e.. D.Ed. Accordinam me D.Ed. Cam holders are also covered by the decision in Wtit Femion (3.) No.5862 of 2006 (Hemant Kumar Vishwakanna vs. Stats of Chhntliagam and omens) (supra). 3. For the afotementioned reasons, these writ petihons are disposed of in tenns of me decision of this Court in the mater of Yashwant Kumar'Bharadwqj (Supra). subject to 'veriticadon of the feet as to whether the petitioners have acquired D.Ed. Cem‘ticates at their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24-1 2-1998 and 1-3-1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. 4. A copy of this order be placed on record in other connected writ petition. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1 2008 (ll) MPJR-OG W