IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF WHATTLSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.P. (S) N0. t^<63 /2011 PETCTIONER ip..-1"^-. .^1-%:^ RESPONDENTS Bhuwan Lal Diwakar, aged about 40 years, S/o Shri Ramadhar Diwakar, working as Upper Divisiort Teacher 6ovt. Middle School Pali, Block Podi Uproda, Distt. Korba (C.6.) 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, &.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) 2.^" Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Raipur, Oistt. Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Korba, Distt. Korba(C.6.) 4. ' Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) WRITPETETION UNDER ARTiaE 226 OF THE CONSTTTUTIONOF IN&IA The petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under:- 1. "'PARTICULARS OF THE PETETCONER As mentioned in the Cause titte. HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR •3-^ PETITiONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 783 OF 2011 Bhuwan Lal Diwakar Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.V.Shridhar, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 9th day of February, 2011) 1. 2. 3. t-1eard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the peiitioner is entitled to beneflt of two advance increments on account of the fact that the petitioner has passed B.T.I. examination in the year 1992 before entering into the servlce i.e. on 29.06.1993, at his own cost. Learned counsel ap.DearinQ for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res sntegra, as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State of M.P. & O^s.1 as well as by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal^Corporaffon, Durg and 4. anothsi2 and Gopesh Kumar Vjsffria v. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and anothe^. Learned counsel further submits that the instant petitlon is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his casp in the '2009(lll)iV)PJR(SC)59 22006(!!)'MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005 L'SF- •'^i^i^V'""" 7. 2 light of aforestated decisions, subject to verification of the facts asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.T.l. certificate on his own expenses before entering into service. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same wil! be considered and decided, in accordance with !aw and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordinaiv, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd!- L. N^ satfeb^ Abotr\ sshok