WRIT PETITION<S) No.2503 of20QZ ^ ^ 1. Tarising BanclAar S/o Shri Bise Lal Banshhar Age about 35 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Sarra, Block - Pallari, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) 6. 2. Shiv Prasad S/o Shri Tijau Ram Age about 37 years, Asstt. Teaclier, Gcrvt. Middle School, Kodwa, Block - Pallari, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) Ku. Pritima Dhurandhar (Now- Verma) W/o Shri Yashwant Singh Verma Age about 37 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Shankar Nagar, Khamhardih, Distt. - Raipur (C.G.) Pooraa Lal Daliariya S/o Shri Patma Lal Dahariya Age about 37 years, Asstt. Teachei-, Govt. Primaiy School, Gotiya Farma, Block- Pallari, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) Smt. Nandani Venna W/o Shri Umashankar Verma Age about 36 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Binoua Block- Pallaii Distt.- Raipur(C.G.) Mant Rain Venna S/o Shri Samai-u Ram Verma Age about 39 years, Asstt. Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Rampur, Block- Pallari, Distt.-Raipur (C.G.) f*r VERSUS 1. State Govt. ofChhattisgarh, Thi-ough Secretary, School Education Department Mimstry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. District Education Officer, Raipur (C.G.) w /M /:. ^ WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA S.B. : HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRJ SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI Present: Shri Somkant Venna, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Arvind Dubey, Panel Lawyer for the State/ respondents. (Passed on 24tlldayofAprii, 2Q07) Leai-ned couasel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the State/respondents jointly submit that tlie fact and question of law involved iii the present writ petition are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumaf Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Dxu-g and another (2006 (II)MPJR-CG96},whichhas been disposed of vide brder dated 03.04.2006. Leamed counsel appearing fbr the respondents does not coirtrovert the said submissioa; - ;' ' Accordmgly, the writ petition is ailowed in tenns of the order passed in the case of Yasfawant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Mumcipa! Corporation, Durg and another (Supra.), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed./S.T.I Examiuation Ceftificate 011 their own expenses as per thecu-cularsdated24.12.199Sand 01.03.1999 and furtherwhether tliey have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs.: ' ' - 1 . ;;Sd/-'.W-..^.^.; , [ , ,..Satish:K.:^g"|ttotrl. f*- Judge Sufcjiagh