iuKi ? Kfc!! 5 o '^ ^ , ^ ' (od-i IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W,P.(S) No. °-* ^—/ 2011 PETITIONER Pradeep Kumar Bhaskarwar S/o Shri Govin Rao Bhaskarwar, Aged about 46 years, Occupation - Upper Devision Teacher Govt. Hir. Secondary School ipRt<o---""^^fl,.'.^i.,.1.—^''" leacher uovt. Hir. p,e9S"tedw5L^Q3-^&* Kurud Bhilai Distt. Durg (CG). O^ted-—-"' VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur (C.G.) 3. District Education Officer District Durg (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA XI-HC-22 "?>. •^^^ ^ ^-i'XI-HC-22 sniBT^ir Vt-f\* 3^V ^^ ^iea 2-D ^sr -ill'illd'1!, afll'M'ie, r^cll'My ^.^.^^^M TWT?n"aTOra;"""""""""'x:")"""'"""Tp^ •I^B^T' SH^t'^RiIW ^1?g SB: Hon'bleShri Manindra MohanlShrivastava. J. 10-01-2011 Shri Vipin Tiwari, counsel for ttfe Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyer f()r the Heard. Leamed counsel appearing foi| 59. It is further submitted that this judgment of the Supreme Court in th have been issued for considerationi increments as per cireular dated 21-! ^>Iirf^f4trl ^H(yiT'^ le^ <^i-(-$t< i?3ip<n aii^i petitioner. State/respondents. the peUUoner submits that the petitaoner is entiUed to benefrt of two advanc^ increments on account of he having passed B.Ed examination before ^ls appointment at his own cost. It is submitted that the issue invoived iit the present petition is no ionger res integra and ttie same has been finall^ decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena vs. Stalce ofM.P. & Ors.. 2009 Wl) MPJR (SC) Court has also taken a simitar view in tts order dated 06-02-2009 passed in W[P.(S)No.6257 of 2008.Learned counsel for the peUtioner further draws a<tention of this Court to order dated 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeal N]o.124 of 2009, wherem relying upon the ^ case of Asha Saxena (supra) and the order passed by this Court in anot(ier Writ Appeai No.87ff009, dtrections of flie case for grant of two advance P9-1974 issued by the State of Madhya pleaded in the peUtion. Pradesh, after verification ofihe facts] Learned counsel for the resporidente submits that case of the petitioner would also be considered on the sarr^e lines. In view ofthe statement made above, this petitton is finally dlsposed off with a direction to the respondent auUiorities to consider and decide the claim l^ri-? ^•-'; ?g-HC-22 /;? •i"' 3:flS^'q;I h-u* sni^i ^Hi^ yfe^T Deepti 2-0 'ssi •^w\v\^, dTily'ito, r««'iiy'i< wqptrwn^ ^s^..^ ail^l-5^<!IW(ri?a •-^. of the petitioner for grant of two ad^ance 21-09-1874 issued by the State of iacts pleaded in the petition withina increments as per circuiar dated IV|adhya Pradesh, after veriflcation of the pleriod of eight weeks from today. 'bi'l<fc)41-i ^w''S ^ fe^t <Rii*di< »|7SlfSPT 311^1 Sd/'- Mamiidra Mohari Shrivastava Judge [T"'i