•l-— <-c. S?'?^'"~:^ C !^^^i?P^ VJR .»: i- u 't.;;, Anti&K . i*.^' -^-S Ya.t'..9»-; m THE fflGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.S.NO. J_ 1 7_2- /2007 PETITIONER ^ '^ y9'E Suresh Ram Chauhan, S/o Chaitan Ram ^ Chauhan,agedabout35years, ^ F-<"RV'..--' \°.^cy:.1^'!" ..-••' working as L.D.T. Cn-ibal Dep.) .- 0.5\ryy Govt. Praimary School galimar, •••'>;>•,' ^.•••'" block- Dharamjaigarh,Dist- Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT: / ^ 1. State ofC.G. Through. Secretary, Tribal welfare DipartmeBt, Mantralaya D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur ( C.G.) 2. Commissioner, Tribal welfare Department, ptR-SS. University Campus Rflipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Asst. CommissioBer, Tribal welfare Department, Distt- Raigarh. ( C.G.) 'PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF.I'HE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRLATE WRITS OF MANDA- MUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS :- S.B. : HON'BLE M'R. SATISH K. AGNIHOTM. J. WMT PETITION (S) No. 1372 of2007. fl.aut! Versus BtS ot unnamsgai Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govsmment Advocate for tLe State/'resRondeats, (Passed 01-19m ofMarch, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner sub.mrts that the netitioner is workins as Lower Division Teacher, Ths oetitioner obtained B.T.I. Examiaatioa certificate in the year 1992, on his own expenses. 2. Leamed counse! a.ppea.ring for the petitioner submits that the question iavolved, herein asto whether tfae teach.er, who obtained B.T.I. Examinatio" certificate on his own exoenses. is entitlsd to two advance increments. 3. Accordj.ng to leamed counsel for the netitioner. the netitioner is entitled to two advance increments in view ofthe decision ofthis Court in the case of Mumcmal Corporation, Durg and anofher {2006 ('II'S MPJR- CG 96}, This Court in the c.ase of Yasawant Kumar Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and mother (Supra), came to ;he sion that the teachers. who 1. ,/B.T.I- Examination Certificate on their own exoenses. are covered bv the circular 24.12.98 issued bv the State Govemment of ladlrya 4- Leamed counsel.for the netitioner farther submits that tb.e facts and qiiestioa of law involved in the present case are squarely covered bv decision of trds Court in the case of Yashwant Kuraar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporatior (Suora). to whi.ch leamed counsel aonearins for the v'-'-r-"/ respoadents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 5. .A^ccordinelv. the writ oetition is allowed m terms ofthe order oassed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwai Vs, Mumcioal Cor verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner has acqiiirsd B.T.I, Examination Certificate on his owa expecses as per the cireulars dated 2.4.12.1998 & 1 .3.1999 and farther whether he has been paid two advance mcreme.nts or not, No order as to costs, Amit Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge