181^ ^ ^ ^ ^^_ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.('S)NO. &^Li3 /2010 PETITIONER ^ .••' .t^i n^-M^ ^%v" €y. <<• .^ ^ Bhondu Ram Nishad S/o Kodu Ram Nishad, Aged about 44 years, Head Master, Government Primary School Lenajakhar, Block- Bodla, Distt. Kabirdham- (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. / 2. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. Distt. Raipur (C.G.) The District Education officer, Distt. Kabirdham-(C.G.) Block Education officer, Bodla, Distt.Kabirdham- (C.G.) WRJT PETITION UNDER AJtTlCLE 2Z6/227 OFT;HE^CONSTIZUTIQN OF INDIA. "ys? "ii'yi<T)'ii, sfll'M'l'c, fsldiyy ^.......1J^.E..^.A&;..]6^M^ ^< SII^T^I^TO' Wifepfrr w:i?ff A'fy^ ^f ^3?RPT3Tlt?[ Shri Deeoak Jam, couasel Shri Ajit Siagh, P.L. for thej The peutioner, who wa^ Itbr tae petiuoner. a.ppoiBLted OB flie post of Assistant Teacher under tlie Sc^iool Education DepartBient on 2.12.87 (Aiinexuw Pl 1'f is aatrieved bv the actioE of tlie respoadents io. aot adding two a.(|ivance iiicrements m his salar5r even fhoiigh he did his D.Ed. f^om C.G. Madhyain& Shiksba Maad'ai, Raipur s.t his owa costlin the ve&r 2004 after seefcaig lermissiou ibr ths trom. uitl Couasel for fhe petitioaer department. submits tbat ttie rsentio.ner i" entifled for two advance iiicremfcQts as he had obtaiaed D.Ed ExasiiTiation certificate, ixi acc^rdance with ths provisions of i Circular dated 24.12.98 aild ia irfiew of tae judgments of Hon'ble Supreine Court in tlie tnatter cf State of M.P. Sa Aaotner Vs. Badrmarayaa Achaiya and ofh^rs reported iji 1996 SC 2779 and Yashwant Kuiaar Bbardw^j Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg SEd anotlier reported in 20p6 (11) MPJR 96 (CQ). On fhe otlier hand. counbel for the State sutomits fb.at erstevhile State of Madhya Pradesl'1 vide circulai" dated 22.10.1964 allowed advance ;ovemiEtes.t servants who 22.10.1964 whether at his own However, who proceeded on traii] get. two aaxtual iacreinents onlv J inci^uients only to t'tiose oceeded for traitliug up to 'ost or at fhe govei-D.m.ent cost. ting oa or after 23. 10.1964 caa '£the traiaine is at his cost aad "•^^ ^•5>, •at ;<S^ ^ ;"'>1.,_ ^-''" '*•" XI-HC—78 s^ '*iww^, wvi\wi<o, hviwy, ...y:.p;..^..Ql?..:,..c^iA//LO ^..........:.'..............y.-../.....^..;.....-^^QQ sii^r'q^F (ipfg^q) sn^i Ti^riq; ^T? 3U^T ^flt^ not at fhe cost of the Goveinnlent. This circular of dated 23.10.1964 was superceded vid.e Goverauient vide notificated dat4d 3.6.6.1973 ain.ended M.P. Non-Gazette Class-ll Educational $ervices s'Non-coUeeie Servicesi Recruitment and P.rojcnotion Ruiesl B.T.I. or B.Ed degree for appom.tr|ient on the post ofAssistsuit Teacher. The petitioner would iaciciaents onlv ui the coaditioA. that he had obtained 1ns B.T.I/B.Ed./B.T.I. degree at his 4wa cost during service afi:er ^NBmt;T WTCif ^ fs^t tfSR^R ^'sifinaiR^ brder dated 10.12.1975. The 1993 added quslit'ication of be eufitled fbr advaG.ee obtaii'iiiig permission fomi the de^artraent between 23.10.1964 j to 1.3.99. To clarifv ihe above po^ition, cii-cu]at~s have ah-eady been issued oa 6.2.2007 and on 3(). l.09. Facts, as detaUed above, acel not ui dispute. This Couil is the raatter of Yashwant Kuiaar I^haradwaj (supra) elaborateiy discussing ttie circulars dated 2 upon the judginent of tb.e HonTil^ Apex Court in the niattsr of Badru-iarayart Achan'a's case fsujoiai has held that teachers, not assistaut teachers alone, woij increraeuts on obtainuig B.Ed 22.10.1964, as the circular (j i4.12.98. 1.3.99 sjid reivins 4ated 22.10.1964 does not prescribe an.y outer ]imit oftlie p^riod ofobtataing B.Ed, M.Ed Ss B.T.I. certificate. It lias toeea fi.<rtber held that circuiar dated 1.3.99 is applicable to only Assistjant Teachers (LDT) asri not to ofh.er teacliers (L7DT). n be eatitled to two advaiice ixaaiination certificate after T ^^ ^L 7 T &1'lt, XI-HC—7S 'S'Sf •<1|<||<'|<1, ®'q1<H'|ia,fqdKHy ..^^.£:..(&.).CA?.:..^'?l.ai(c, 31I^T'q^i'(' an^E qit Rii'b ia Yashwant Kuraar Bharadwal fiaality aad case offhe petitioner covered by the above iudgm.l 24.12.1998. For the aforesaid reasons, |the petitioner is entitled to fhe flavinent of frivo advance in.creineijits froni tlie date of declaration of the petitioner's D.Ed. examir|ation result. The respondents 'mqfepfri •wrcff^' ft^t TR<<^i< ^affinaiii?; Shri Siuga fairly subinits 1piat. principle of law laid down I's case (supra} has attauied |ui fllis petitioa is also squarely fcnt as also cu'culaT dated are accordragly, directed to m; iacreinents to tlie petitioner froin exaiaination, within a period However, this ord.er shaU be subj f&e State regarding facts pleaded] No onler as to costs. ^ke payment of two advance t]ie date of her passing D.Ed. lof four nionfhs froia todav. Sct to all verifications made by !in tbe petition. • Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge !~