w Wac/f In the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattishgarh at Bilaspur (C.G.) WP. (S) No? (316% 2009 / PetitionerS (1) Udhodas Vaishnaw, Aged 43 Years, S/o Shri Manmohan Das Vaishnaw, Head- Master, Govt. Primary School, Pendri, Block Dhamda District Durg (2) Narsingh Sahu, Aged 44 Years, S/o Shri Ramhu Ram Sahu, U.D.T. Govt. Middle School, Devri, Block Dhamda, District Durg (3) Rupen Singh Atri, Aged 50 Years, S/o Shri Ramadhar Singh Atri, Head Master Govt. Primary School, Bharni, Block Dhamda District Durg / (4) Smt. Savitri Kshatry, aged 45 years, W/o Shri Rupen Sigh Kshatry, Head—Master Govt. Primary School, Navagaon, Block Dhamda District Durg r’ (5) Onkar Prasad Rajak, Aged 47 years, r S/o Shri Nakchhed Prasad Balbhadri U.D.T. Govt. Girls Middle School, Dhamda, District Durg (6) Mahendra Prasad Mali, aged 38 years, S/o S/o Shri Ramji Mali, Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Paras-Board, Distt. Durg / . (7) Smt. Sushila Rajput, aged 48 years, S/o Shri Pancharn Singh Rajput, Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Hardi, Block Dhamda District Durg / (8) Satish Kumar Upadhaya, aged 49 years, S/o Shri Kunjlal Upadhaya, _ K / (9) Brijesh Tiwari, aged 38 years, S/o ShriVishvanath Tiwari, U.D.T. Govt. Middle School, Navkesha, Distt. Durg (10) Mahendra Singh Rajput, aged 46 years S/o S/o Shri Shukh Nandan singh Rajput U.D.T. Govt. Govt. Middle School, Ghada— Dih, Distt. Durg U.D.T. Govt. Higher Secondary School, Devkar, Distt. Durg , 2. (1 1) Smt. Shadhana Rajput, aged 43 years, W/o Shri Mahqndra Singh Rajput U.D.T. Govt. Middle School, Mohgaon, Block Dhamdhaq Ms n w ‘Dmg ‘ K (12) Smt. Indumati aadil, aged 46 years, W/o Shri Rajendra aadil, Head Master, Govt. Primary School, Pathariya, Block Dhamda Distt. Durg 2" (l3) Smt. Aasha Bhopley, aged 43 years, W/o Shri M.K. Bhopley, U.D.T., Govt. Middle School, Chorha, Block Dhamda, Distt. Durg ./ (l4) Smt. Hemlata Thakur, aged 39 years, W/o Shri Dhursingh Thakur, U.D.T. Govt. Middle School, Modal Town, Distt. Durg / (15) Smt. Pemin Bai Koshariya, aged 45 years, W/o Shri Hubsingh Koshariya, Head—Master, Govt. Primary School, B.R.P. Mahuvari, ,/Maroda, Distt. Durg (16) Dashrath Lal Sahu, aged 49 years, S/o Shri Parauram Sahu, Head—Master, Govt. Primary School, Hardi, Block Dhamda, Distt. Durg / (l7) Khelan Ram Thakur aged 39 years S/o Shr1 Aatmaram Thakur Head Master Govt Primary School Block Dhamda District Durg V (l 8) Heamant Kumar Netam, aged 44 years, S/o Shri Gaindlal Netam, Head—Master Govt. Primary School, Dargaon, Distt. Durg (16) Ramesh Kumar Dewangon aged, Head Master, Govt. Pronnat Primary School, Borai, Block Durg District Durg (C.G.) Versus Respondents ...... 1. State Government of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, School Education Department Ministry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer, Durg. 3. Block Education Officer, Dhamdha, Distt. Durg 4. Block Education Officer, Durg (C.G.) )‘V x Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for Issuance 0f Writ or Mandamus/Dirgction or other aggropriate writ r H1GVH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR \NRIT PETiIlON (S) No. 6168 of 200§ PETITIONERS : Udhodas Vaishnaw & 18 others. ‘ VERSUs RESPONDENTS : State Government of Chhattisgarh & others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’ble Shri Sati$h K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. QBAL OROER (Passed on 05th day ef January, 2010) Heard learned counsel for the parties. . By this'petition, the petitioners eeek a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of D.Ed examination, on their own expenses, during their service period. ' . Shri Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue inlved in the present case is no longer res infegra as the same has Been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of Yashwanz‘ Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another1 and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt, of Chhattisgarh and another? . . Shri Verma further submits that the instant petition is'squareiy covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioners may be permitted to make a representation to decide their 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 of their service. . Learned counsel appearing for the Stateirespondents submits that in the event, the petitioners makes a representation, the same wili be considered and decided, in accordance with iaw and in the light of the decision of this Court-in Yashwanz‘ Kumar B'haradwaj and Gopesh Kumar li/erma (supra), within a period o‘f four I‘ weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. .g Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- ‘ I " ,— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1 2006 (H) MPJR CG 96 2 WP (S) No.4130 of 2005 ...... vo i