wuw{/_ IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.) v WP. (S) No ............................... 2011 aV600 L x l v ‘ T ? Rohit 1a1 $ahu, S/o Shri Khulfmuram Sahu, Upper Division Te‘acher , aged about 38 years, Govt. Middle School Rampur(k)— Block Kasdol District Raipur (C.G.) ‘Chand Ram Sahu, S/o Shri firtu Ram Sahu, aged 43 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Hatud Block Kasdol, District ~ Raipur(C.G.) a Mahesh Chandra YadaV, S/o Shri Kartik Ram Yadav, aged about 47 years, Upper Division Teacher Govt. ‘ Middle School Virnarayanpur Block Kasdol District Raipur (C.G.) Ganesh Ram Sahu, S/o Shri Dhaniram Sahu , aged about 51 years, Upper Division Teacher Block Kasdol District Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through — Secretary Education _ Department D.K.S Bhawan l Raipur (C.G.) PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS 2 i District Education Balodabajar CG.) officer , L{2 WRIT PETITON UNDER CONSTITUTION OF INDIA QLE @ %6, A 226 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CHHA'TTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 2480 0f2011 PETITIONER : Rohit Lal S hu & Others VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhatnsgarh & Another WRIT PETI HON UNDER ARTIQLE 226 01‘? THE CON STI PUTION OF INDIA SB' Hon’b'le Shrl Satlsh K gnihotri. J i Present Shn §omkant Verma Advocate for the petmoner Shm AV Shridhar Panel Lawyer for the State/respohdents ORBER (ORAL (Passed on 09 day ofMay, 201 1) 1.: By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to iipay two advance increments from the date of passing of D.Ed examination, on their own expenses, during their service period. 2.: Shri Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits I that the issue involved in the present ease is no longer res integral as the same has been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of Yashwam‘ Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg & ‘ another 1 and Gopesh Kumar Verma 'v. The State Govt. of Chhaitisgarh and another; . . Shri Verma further submits that the instant petition is squarely : covered by the deCISion as aforestated Thus the petitioners mav be s permitted to make a representation to deside his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification of the fact asto whether the petitioners have acquired -D.Ed certificate on their oWn expenses during the course oftheir service. s i ‘ 2006 tnWiPJn-m 95 Z wms) No‘linso oi‘2oo5 ’ 2 . Learned counsel appearing fOr the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioners make a represehtation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance w‘ law andin the light of the decisions of this Court in Yashwa t Kumar Bharadwaj and J Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks dom the date ofreceipt ofthe representation. . In View of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. of. . Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed Satish K.Agnihotri j E Sd/- Judge twe-w/ u