\ v z r Single Banch C“ §>f®6€.N.N..... IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P.(S)No. $6“ 0F2011. VERSUS RESPONDENTS / : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) / 2. District Education Officer, District Education Office Durg, District Durg (C. G.) /~ 3. Additional District Education Officer, Education District Bemetara, District Durg (C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer, Block Nawagarh, District Durg (C.G.) PETITIONER : /" Hridayram Bhuarya, Son of Bahur Singh, aged about 44 years, Upper I“ " Division Teacher, Govt. Middle a 2/9 3\m..-mf;g":¢;6« School Maro, Block Nawagarh, W Bemetara Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22 CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @ 6 OF THE 3a W, WWI—5:, mm}; 35‘ 3mm (Wu) ammfa‘aia; 3911mm mmm WW wW éwx‘mm SB : Hon’ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. 30-09-201 1 Shri Mirza Hafeez Baig, coun ;el for the petitioner. Shri State/respondents on advance copy Heard. for the petitioner submits that the petitioner ts entitled to benem of two advance increments on account of he having passed B.T.l. examination b submitted that the issue involved i integra and the same has been finally decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxeni MPJR (SC) 59. lt is further su similar view in his order dated O6 2008. Learned counsel for the p Court to order dated 29-04-2010 wherein relying upon the judgmen Asha Saxena (supra) and the ord Appeal No.87/2009‘ directions h case for grant of two advance incr ments as per circular dated 21-09-1974 issued by the State of Madhya pleaded in the petition. ondents submits that now the State. Government had issued a circul r on 05-01-2011 and the case of the petitioner would be examined in the light of the decision of the State Government. Deputy Government Advocate fo r Praveen Das, the efore appointment at his own cost. It is 1 the present petition is no longer res a vs. State of M.P. & Ors., 2009 (III) tted that this Court has also taken a 2-2009 passed in W.P.(S)No.6257 of titioner further draws attention of this assed in Writ Appeal No‘124 of 2009, of the Supreme Coutt in the case of r passed by this Court in another Writ been issued for consideration of the Learned counsel for the r radesh, after vermcation of the facts mmwtrgmgan/wtmo Learned counsel appearing b a ' p 36 mw,m,faaw mm W 200 mm (Wu) ammm ammww mmm *1” WW1§1E€VW aaaifanam In view of the statement made above, this petition is many disposed of with a direction to the responden authorities to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for‘grant of o advance increments in view of the ‘ddwmFa‘s aiso in view of crcuiar, which has been issued by the St V nt on 05-01-2011‘ fter verification of the facts pleaded in hé'ipetitton within a period of thre months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. , N WMWV Sd/-’ v x a V Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Tumane *“t