sisris B©s •'^^e- \.^>>; c/^i^i_ IJM THEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT w.p. rsi No. BILASPUR S~-i-{-L-t ^ /2006 PETITIONER J°/^f .<^y ^y /' t-.--'-y A" ff ty ^^ y RESPONDENTS ^^^ ^y 0 Hanuman Das Vaishnavy' S/o.Raghunath Das Vaishnav Aged about 46 years Post- Assistant Teacher R/o. Village & Post-Siladehi, Block-Bamhanidh, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS :1. State of Chhattisgarh^ Through : Secretary Department of Education Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer,^ Janjgir, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer^' Block-Bamhanidih District-Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT ^ETITION U/A 226/277 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRITS IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS IIIG1 ( COUI^OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASHJR W, P. (s) No. 5439 of 2006 Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Beniram Shrivas Veraus State of Chhattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 5440 of2006 Hanuman Das Vaishnaw Versus State ofChhattisgarh & ofhera Sintjle Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satlsh K. AgnUtotri. Shri Ramakaat Pandcy, Advocate for thc Pctitioncrs. Shri Ufkarsh Venna, Govt Advocate for the State/respondents. ORDER (27tb Octnber, 2006) 1. The pctitioners are working as Assistant Teachcra ia thc govcmment schools. In the coiuse of their services as Assistent Teachers, the petitioners have obteined D.Ed. certfficates on fheir own cxpcnses before 1.3.1999. 2. Leamed counsel for the petitioners submits fhat tfac 'Basic Trauung Institute' (B.T.I.) certificate has been renamed by fhe order of fhe State Govenunent as 'Diploma in Education' (D.Ed.) certificate. The petitioners, who have oblamed D.Ed. certificate prior to 1.3.1999 are entitied to the same reliefas is granted to the candidates who had obtained B.T.I./B.Ed. certificates on fheir own cxpenses as per thc circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999. 3. Writ Petition (s) No.s 5439/2006 and 5440/2006 are being disposed ofby fhis cominon order as fhe facts and qiiestion oflaw involvcd in both thc petitions are comnion. 4. According to leamed counsel fer thc petitioners, thc petitioncrs are entifled to two advance iiicreinents ni VKW of fhc decision of ttus Court in thc case of Yashwant _Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Muiucipal Corporation. Duiy and anothcr {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Coiut in thc case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), came to fhe " l-i 8. Accordiagfy, in fhe event.D.Ed. certificate holdere are cqual to B.T.I./B.Ed. certificate holdera, they are entiflcd to fhe samc relief ia terms of the orders passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Mtmicipal Corpoi'ation, Dui^ and another (Supra), subject to vcrification offhe fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired D.Ed. Certificate on fheir awn expenses as per fhc circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further whefher thcy have been paid two advance uicreincnts or not. No order as to costs. 9. A copy offhis order be placed on recoid in coanected matter. Thaku3 Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge