C^P-I ^r IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTOF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.) WRIT PETITION fS) N0. .c^ & °?- QF 2010 PETITIONER : c^%t<;.^ y.;^<>'"" RESPONDENTS : ^ .^&i-3¥i% ^, ^..^.^^. 1: w^ ::£,1 Moti Chand Patel, S/0 Shankar Lal Patel Occupation Head Master, Aged about 61 years, R/o village Shalhe Tahsil Dabhra District JanjgirChampa (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State ofChhattisgarh, through Secretory Department OfEducation Dau Kalyan singh bhavan ^.ipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer District Janjgir Champa, (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer Dabhra Dist.Janjgir Champa, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UUNDER ARTICLES 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. ^'^/ sffG—78 ^-sr ^iiAii^^ ^t{|<'-i^(o, f^TRry »-.yf..C^.^...-5^&.Rj..L?_ 'm^TT '^NJch""""""^"^'""""""""""""'""-'^ 200 ^nr^r "T^RT (i^I^^) ^A 3^1 ^FT f^-ljch '^8TT 3?T^?[ $t)^i<^ ^HW^rfi?f3^?T SB : Hon'uie Snri fvJaniriuraMuhali|iShnva§t§v?L,.J^ 21 "06-2010 Shri Karnai Kishore Patei, coMnsei Smt. Smita Ghai, Panei Law^er copy. Heard. fin^iiy Learned counsei appearing is entitied to benefit of two advart passed B.Ed. examination beforel submitted that the issue invoived | integra and the sarne has been in the case of Ashs Ssxww vs. Si 53. it is further submitted that this order dated 08-02-2009 passed counsel for the petitioner fuilher d^ 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeai | judgment of the Supreme Court in| order passed by this Court in have been issued for considerati<tn increments as per Gircuiar dated 2f Pradesh, after verification of the• fadts Learned counsei for the petitioner vvouid aiso be consjdere^ <=M^f<n4ii T?TR^f "^* fe^t <fii^i< ^^tRman^T for the petitioner. for the State/respondents on adv'ance ^>r the petitioner submits that the petltlonef |ce Increments on account of he having his appointment at his own cost. it is |in the present petition is no ionger re^ decided by the Hon'bie Supreme Court fafe ofM.P. & Grs., 2009 (Ifi) (SC) Court has also taken a simiiar vlew in his |ln W.P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. Leamed ijaws attention of this 'Court to order dated jNo.124 of 2009, wherein reiying upon the |t?ie case of Asha Saxena (supra) and the VVrit Appeai No.87/2009, directions of the case for grant of frwo advance I -09-1974 issued by the, State of ivladhya pieaded in the petition. anbther 'espondents submlts thM case of the' on the sarne lines. . . '^ :«rf^li '•^/ 3—78 ^T^I^Tf^TNF '^T8TT ^TT^T 5t)HW Dyeijll ~3^ ^NK'i^, ^t<i •<-j^|(o, f^<ri|^j^< ^.Atf.6..^...(^..:...0?.^..^ @ 200 3TT^TTT^RF (a ^<nw ^rf^r 3??^r in view of the statement rna with a direction to the respondent of the petitioner for grant of two 21-09-1974 issueci by the State o facts pieaded in the petition vvjthin ^raferah ^roff if fe^t Tf3R?R ^-STRma^T i^e above, this petition is finafiy disposed of luthorities to consider and decide the ciaim ^dvance increments as per clrcuiar dated Madhya Pradesh, after verificatlon of the pefiod of eight weeks from today. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge