e f I»ii"'?f!H C^l-yo}^- @|||^S£R?' INJTHE±11GH COURT^)F^JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W. P.(S). N0. 5'^° /2006 PETITIONER -'^ .^My/ °%M/ o'--' ^0" :•• ^ ^' ^s- RESPONDENT .0-'' .<-;-€•<t% ^Tb r^^o ^c!^^' o^ ^ Dhaniram Baya S/o Shri Shivcharan Baya Age about 39 years, Village-Jauda Post- Pond Tehsil -Abhanpur Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS ^1. StateGovt.ofChhattisgarh Through Secretary Educational Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Drictt.-Raipur(C.G.) 2. District Education Officer Raipur, District-Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2^6/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^: HIGH CQURT QF CijHAlSlSGARH AT BiLASPUK W. P. (sl No. '5753 ot'2006 Pcititioner : Sakun Bhiniagaj 1 . Versus R^spoudents : State of Clihattisgailt & others W. P. (s) No. 5754 of2006 P^titioner ; Smt. Shyamlata Dlu-uva Versus , ! : •. ' i[espondents : State of Cliliattisgarh & otliers Retitioner Jl . . < (^espondents Petitioner pespondents ^titioner jRespondents W. P. (sY No. 5758 of 2006 Likhesh Kzuaar Sen /ersus StateofClihattisgarh& others W. PJ^ No. 5759 of 2006 Praveen Chandra Sahu /ersus State of Chhattisgarh & oftiers W. P. (s) No. 5760 pf 2006 DhaniratnBava VGrsus State ofChhattisgarh& others Sla^e Bencli: Hon'ble Mr. Justicc Satish K. Agailiotri. Sliri Amit KymEU' Shai-ma, Advocate for the Petitionei-s. Shri UtkarshVerma, Govi; Advocate for tlie State/respondents. ^v (27* October,2006) That the petitioners are working as Assistant Teachers m the govemnient scliools. In the cou.rse of t.beir services as Assistant Teachei-s, tbe pe.titione.rs have obtaiaed B.Ed./B.T.I. examination certificateson thetrown expensesbefore l.3.1999. Writ Petition (S)No.s 5753/2006, 5754/2006, 5758/2006, 5759/2006 and 5760/2006 are bemg disposed of by fhis common 3. 4. s. order cis tlie lacts axid questioil ofiaw involved ui tliese pet.itioi.ls aitt coranioa. 1 ' . . ' • .•'•••.''. Accorduig to leamed counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to ttvo advance mcrements in viewof fbe decision of fhis Court in the case of Yashwast_KymaE _Bharadwai _Vs, Municipal Coi-porauon, Durg aad aDOther {2006 (II) MPJR-C.G 96j. ^This Court ia the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. iMunicipal Corppration, Diirg and another (Supra), came to fhe iconclusioii that fhe teachers.who had obtained B. Ed. /B.T.I. |Bxamtnatiou Cei-titicate pn tlieir own expehses, ai-e covcred by The lcircular dated 24.12.98 (Aii.nexiu'e P/7) issued' by tlie Stafe |Govcniment of Madhya Praclesh. ! Fui-th.er in the matter of Smt Maiioraiaa Shrivastava Vs. Stare of jM.P. and others {2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } tbc Madhya Pradcsli State AdministratLve Tribunal, Gwalior Bench,while considerin.g ;tbe circular dated 1.3.1999 wherem, it is provided fhat the Assistant Teachers, who liave acquu-ed B.Ed. degree at tlieir own icost betweeu 23.10.1964 aad 7.5.1973 shall be entitled to tvvo i advance increments, relied on decisioii m fhe case of Rakesh 1 jKumaTShrivastavaVs. State of M. P. & others passed in O.A.No. 1632/99, decidedon 12.10.1999 wherein it is.observed that the cu-czilar dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retiisspectively. hus, a teacher, may be Assistaiit Teacher, who has obtaincd 1 B.Ed. degree'before 1.3.1999 is eutitled to hvo advaiice 1 . . • • '. •. ; ' .'•.'.••'. . . • • ..- increments. . It is pointed out by leamed counset appeailiig for the petitioners tbat. the tlien State of Madhya Pradesh ha.d filed a Special Leave Petition against the orders passed by the Tribunal aiid tlie Hon'ble Supreine Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 tUed against Ihe order of the Tribunal. Therefore, tlie du-ection to fhe et&et fhat tlie circiilar dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becomes fuial and the same shaH be applicable t6 all tlie Assistant Teachers vvho have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. exaisiu'iation certiflcate bcfore 1.3.1999. It is further substa.ntiated tov a cu-cular'dated "] ;(,. III' 8 17.10.2003 issued by. the presem Stete of •Mad.uya Pradesh wherein Tl-ie cu'cnlar cleat'lv states about rlie decision of the Supi-eule Court. Leamed coiinsel for the petitionera further submits that tlie lacts and question of law iavolved ia the present case are squai~ely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yasliivaat Kumai' Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporatioii, Durg aiicl another (Supra), to which leamed col.iiisel appearitig for fhe respondents fauly concedes aad agreeswith the avermeiit ma.de. by leaiTied coiinscl a.ppeaiing for tbe petitidneni. Acconluigly, the writ petitipn is allowed in tei'ms of the order passed m fhe case of Yashwant Kiimar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporatioa, Durg and aaofher (Siipra), subjecl to veriScation of the fact as towhelher the petitiDners have acqi.iired B. Ed./B.T.I. Exaniuiation Certificafe oii ffieir own expenses as per the circulai-s dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 aiid fui-tAer. whether they have been paicl two advance mcrements or aot. No order as to costs. A copy ofthis ordcr be placed 011 recoi-d ia connccted luatters. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge