-HC—78 3?T^T ^T ^FfN? ^l sr»*iich '3T55T '<11*11<nA|, ^•<ll'<Hi|<o, fs|<vll'y*j,< 111CTI (l»HI<t» •"^200 31T^T TRW ( yii^^) '(PRnW^lf^T Sinale Bench; Hon'ttle Mr. Justice Dhirendra Mishra) W.P. fsV Mo.747/2009 (Petition U/A226 of Petitioner Smt.lNeelima Tiwari, W/o Suresh Tiwari, Agedjabout 47 years, Assistant Teacher, Primal'y Main Hindi Balakshala, Bhatapara, Distt.l Raipur- (C.G.), R/o Nehru Ward, Bhata^ara, bistt. Raipur (CG) Vs RESPONDENTS Rairiur 06.2.2009 Mr. Deepak Jain, Advoc^ite Mr. Ajay bwivedi, t)y. Gjovt, Heard. The petitioner, who of Assistant Teacher in the the State ^overnment, is respondents in not adding WO|S cM<4t<n<il^ *ii*i<A*'^ ^^ <f^^i< ^^Jf^RSTT^T he Constitution of India) 1. Stafe of Chhattisgarh, Through, The Sec|"etary Department of Education, Marftralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The| Director Public Instruction, Chhtittisgarh Government Raipur, bistt. Rairiur (C.G.) 3. The[ bistrict Education Officer, bistt. • (C.G.) for the petitioner. . Advocate for the State. initially appointed on -the post >chool Education Department of a|ggrieved by the action of the |wo advance increments in her ..ste XI-HC—78 3?n^?T ^it Rl^oh 'WTSH^T »»*iicti c<) ^T^r r^l^l<rt^ ^Tll^-'Ko, f^TRT^ : *ii*iCTi<B(>*ii<i»""""'""""*"""""""""""""' ^(^^O^ \ W^T 'q'^F (yt^^) l^<iw< w^a ^i^<!i II^TI ^\\^ ^2.+ salary even though she did h| expenses before joining on tl^ ir B.Ed. Examination at her own |e post of Assistant Teacher. Learned counsel for petitioner's case is squarely in W.P. (s) No.591/200^ others Versus The State of this Court and this petition direction given by this Court in The above fact has not for the State. the petitioner submits that the ;overed by the decision of this befween Preetam Singh Parihar and Ch|iattisgarh and another decided by be disposed of in terms of the I'he aforesaid matter. m4y In view of above, the ins|t"ant a direction to the respondent^ increments to the petitioner f|"< within a period two months fror|i be subject to all verifications pleaded in thepetition.No ord4r Certified copy as per rul^s. <^H(<n<i1<i *ii*-i<nT^f fsl<1 <f^i<^i< i73tRm3TT^T been disputed by learned counsel petition is disposed of with to make payment of two advance F^om the date of her appointment today. However, this order shalt rjiade by the State regarding facts as to costs. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge