HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WritPetition CS) No. 1445 of2009 PETITIONER EESPONDENTS Gopesh Kumar Sahu, S/o Latelu Ram Sahu, aged about 33 y^ars, Assistaiit Teacher, Goveniment Middle School Mopka^ Development Block Bhatapara, Distnct Raipur (CG). VERS'US 1. The State 06 CKhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Educatioii, DK8 Bhawaii, Raipur (CG), 2. District. Education Officer, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG). 3. Block Education Officer Development Block Bhatapara, District Raipur (GG). (WRIT PETmON UNDER ARIICLE 226 OF THE CONSITTUTION OF INDIA) CSB: Hon'bleMr. Satish K. Asmhptri, J.^ Present : Shri A.K. Prasad, Advocate ferthe pefitioner. 1 Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate forthe State. 1>«»1 ORALORDER (Passcd on 19th day ofMarch, 2009) 1. With the consent of leamed counsel appearing for the parties/the matter is heard fmally. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to graiit oftwo increments as he has obtained D.Ed. certificate 011 his own expenses during fhe service period. Leamed counsel flirther submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to make a representation to the aufhorities fbr grant oftwo increments pursuant to the judgment and order passed by this Court m the matter of Yash^wnt Kumar Bharad^vaj v. Municipat Corporation, Durg and another1 and W.P.(8.) No. 4130 of2005, Gopesh Kurnar Verma -vs. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another. 5 2006(11) MPJR-CG 96 Sahu Tlie State Govemment is under aii obligation to follow the law settled by this Court and it is not necessaryto approachfhis Courtby each and every employee when the law has already been settled by Ifais Court. The employees, ^?ho are similarly situated and have not approached the Court, may be treated at par wifh other employees, who have approached fhis Court. It is not necessary to approach this Court fbr similar order. In view of the foregoing reasoris, lfhis petition stands disposed ofwith liberty resen/red to the petitioner, on the request of leamed counsel, to make a representation. Ifthe representation is filed by the petitioner, tlie same may be considered and decided, in accordance with law on its own merit as e^qpeditiously as possiblej, preferably within a period of eight weeksfromfhedateofreceiptoftherepresentati^ Consequeritly, pendmg applications, ifany, staiid disposed of Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge