L^~^^_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (Sl No.t /2010 PETITIONER Bhuvan Lal Patel S/o Chandramani Patel aged about 36 years, Assistant Teacher Govt. Primary School, Chhote ^ '\.y Devgoan, Block- Kharsia, ^'^ RESPONDENTS ^€e/ District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS ' State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Deportment, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) Coramissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) g~ Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Raigarh District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. The Block Education Officer, Block- Kharsia District Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE tlf:M •^ N CONSTITUTION OF INDIA io '3"5E[ "4|.4|d'4, »ti1y'IS, fs«rll'H>j,< W.p.is} 60-36/(S Wl 200 3ir^TTr^T ('yi^'v11) sn^r ^ir R-fi* (T^ 3TT^?T sh+iiqi naiw ^ftd 3ii^i Shri Ajay Kum.ar Barik, COT; Shri Sumesh Bajaj, Dy. G.f Counsel for the petitioner entitied to benefit of two advanc^ having passed D.Ed, exaininatior) own cost. It is subnutted fh.at th( petition is no longer res integra decided by the Hon'ble Suprem) ofM.P. &0rs.i It is further subniitted fh^ sirailar view in its order dated 6| 6257/2008. Counsel for fhe peti^ order dated 29.4.2010 passed 41 wherein relyiag upon the judgme^it case ol'Asha Saxena (supra) an.d| in another Writ Appeal No. 81 issued for consideration of the t increDients as per circular dated of Madhva Pradesh, after verifical uetition. Counsel for the State subBJ would also be considered on the i <ftiql<?i<ih 'Rw^ff ^' 'fe'^lr ^R^K ^aifOTsn^r [nsel for the oetitione] 1. for fhe State. |subinits that the petitioner is iacrenients on accoiuit of he before hjs appoiatraent at his issue iavolved in the present bid fhe saine has been finatlv b Court hi the case of t this Coiirt has also taken a .2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. ioner further subiaits fhat the Writ Appeal N0. 124/2009, of tfae Supreme Court te the fhe order passed by this Court / 2009, directions have beea ;ase for grant of two advance 21.9.1974 issued bv fhe State tion of fhe facts pleaded in fhe its tbat case of fhe petitioners taes. ^-£T^iq|<y|(<^ ynll-a'IS, fa(Cll'M^< . ^.f-csj^ose/^ Si^T 'W (' ^HT^ In view of above, fhe petiti<j dil-ection to fhe respondent aufhoritiejs p^titiQner for graiit of two advance d^ted 21.9.1974 issiied by the Stat4 ve^'ification of the facts pleaded in th^ weeks froia today. It is niade clear that fhis Coilrt o^iaion on inerits of the case aad tuld be at Uberty to decide the sd wfl WJ| (^fe_ th law. ^N?piN-WRff 4ft^ ^N^R ^affinaD^r jn is disposed of with a to decide the claini of fhe ^ncreinents as per circular 4 of Madhya Pradesh after petition wifhia a period of has not e.xpi'essed any |fhe aufhority concemed l.iae stricfly in accordance Sd/- pritinker Diwakar Judge