^ IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISHGARH AT BILASPURC.G. W.P.(S)No. ^ 201 (() !^j PETITIONER ... RESPONDENS ^^;.. -:.'-•••". ^^^^ " Smt. Yantri Padwar, aged 45 years W/o Shri Gulab Padwar, Head-Mistress, Govt. Primary School, Budhasar, Tah., Chhuikhadan, District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS (1) The State Government of Chhattishgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department Ministery, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) <-^' (2)The District Education Officer, Rajnandgaon, WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSSUANCE OF MANDAMUS OF WRIT/ DIRECTION OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT m i.f^^.^SdSSg^^:^^: HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S)N0.58 OF 201 1 Petitioner Respondents Versus Smt. Yantri Padwar The State Government of Chhattisgarh & Another (Writ Petition underArticle 226/227 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Government Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 12th day of January, 2011) 1. The petitioner presently posted as Head-Mistress, Government Primary School, Budhasar, District-Rajnandgaon is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not adding two advance increments in her salary even though she obtained certificate of 'Bal Sevika Training Course' from the Indian Council for Child Welfare, M.P. Bhopal. The memo issued by the Education Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh to the Director, Public Instruction, specially clarifies that candidates who are under government service and are possessing Bal Sevika Training certificate, will be entitled to all the facilities as are applicable to trained lady teachers employed in the Primary Schools under the State Government for the purposes of'pay scales and advance increments. 2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is entitled for two advance increments, as she had obtained Bal Sevika Trainin^ certificate before her appointment, in accordance with the provisions of circular dated 24/12/1998, which was issued v^ ?^''^;'u!;^y.i'-^yi^^B'lA'y^i,%'J""EI'm?"i' r~1? 1 :'y'^ 4. on the basis of decisions of the Supreme Court in the matter of State ofM.P. &Anotherv. Badrinarayan Acharya & Others .^ On the other hand, Shri Dubey, learned Government Advocate appearing for the State submits that erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide circular dated 22/10/1964 allowed advance increment only to those government servants who proceeded for training upto 22/10/1964 whether at his own cost or at the government cost. However, who proceeded on training on or after 23/10/1964 can get two annual increments only if the training is at his cost and not at the cost of the Government. The circular dated 23/10/1964 was superceded vide order dated 10/12/1975. The Government vide notification dated 16/6/1973 amended M.P. Non-Gazette Class-11 Educational Services (Non-college Services) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1993 added qualification of B.T.1. or B.Ed. degree for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher. The petitioners would be entitled for advance increments only in the condition that they had obtained their BTI/B.Ed. degree at their own cost during service after obtaining permission from the department between 23/10/1964 to 1/3/1999. To'clarify above position circulars have already been issued on 6/2/2007 and recently on 30/01/2009. 1 have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. This Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bhardwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another^ elaborately discussing the circulars dated 24/12/1998, 01/03/1999 and relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of \^ ' AIR 1996 SC 2779 22006(2)MPJR-Cp96 £?. ^^?:?it^'^%?^^^^§^^^^^^^'c 8. 9. Badrinarayan Acharya has held that teachers, not Assistant Teachers alone, would be entitled for two advance increments on obtaining B.Ed. examination certificate after 22/10/1964, as the circular dated 22/10/1964 does not prescribe any outer limit of the period for obtaining B.Ed., M.Ed. & B.T.1. certificate. It has been further held that circular dated 01/03/1999 is applicable to only Assistant Teachers (LDT) and not to other teachers (UDT). Shri Dubey, learned Government Advocate for the State fairly submits that principle of law laid down in the matte of Yashant Kumar Bhardwaj, has attained finality and case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the above judgment as also circular dated 24/12/1998. He also does not dispute the memo issued by the Education Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh to the Director, Public Instruction. For the reasons mentioned hereinabove, the petitioner is entitled to the payment of two advance increments from the date of appointment of the petitioner on the post pf Assistant Teacher. The respondents are accordingly directed to make payment of two advance increments to the petitioner from the date of her appointment within a period of two months from today. However, this order shall be subject to all verifications made by the State regarding facts pleaded in this petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order asto costs. 'ZJ) Arun Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotn Judge •raiiiHiar