tmGlE BENCT ^ (^ -f~< j uvi IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S) No. n 12QW- PETITIONER Smt. Savita Dev Murari W/o Shri Shri Anil Dev Murari, Aged about 47 years, \\& r,....--" ^ Occupation - Assistant Teacher, Govt. -^l^^.^'" '--•rf Primary School Junwani Bhilai Distt. t-ia- f^'- 2^"^^- ^"'^^-•y""~ Durg (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS /' 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur (C.G.) 3. District Education Officer District Durg (CG) / WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA .<':-^a»s ^l '..y-%a-HC-n sn^i^ Vw* anfn ^W^ yf5<T ^si •^Wf\ti, ^Tfl'y'i'o, r^wKiy 3TI^?T XR^? (S' t(ii«iiai*<icb -y^ I^T^T' sii^T^giwofOT SB :lton'bie Shri Manindra Mohan Bhrivastava. J, forttle 1041-2011 Shri Vipin Tiwari, counsel Shri Ajit Singh, Panet Lawyer fi Heard. Learned counsel appearing forjthe petitioner submits that Uie peUtioner is entiUed to benefrt of two advancel submitted that the issue involved in| integra and the same has been finally) in the case of Asha Saicenavs. StaSeofM.P, &0rs,, 59. it is ftirther submitted that ttiis order dated 06-02-2CX)9 passed in W 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeal N judgment of the Supreme Court in th cblil[(vl4l'l 'KW^ff ^ ^^ <^i-^« '^aifwTsn^t petitioner. r ttie State/respondents. increments on account of she having passed B.Ed examination before h^r appointment at her own cost. It is the present peUtion Is no ionger res decided by the Hon'bte Supreme Court ^DMPJRfSC) pourt has also taken a stmilar view in its .P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws at(entlon of this Court to order dated .124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the case of Asha Saxena (supna) and the order passed by this Court in anothter Writ Appeal No.87/2009, directlons have been issued for consideration Pradesh, after verification ofthefacts pf the case for grant of two actvance increments as per circutar dated 21-Q9-1974 issued by the State of Madhya pleaded in the peBUon. Learned counsel for the respon<jtente submits that case of the peUtfoner would also be considered on the sam^ lines. rTm; '. :~-'-v^.^-t, -iT-. '^ <z-'2- "feiI-HC-22 •S^ -^W\v\«{, ri'dl'H'ltB, («lcliyll< _....AJi..(?.^..^...^rl, MMv\\ *Ki% fq^T' an^T^l l^iNsn^r st^^i^ yfs^ Deepti aii^i'renwtifpt 3- in view of the statement madt wift a direction to the respondent of Uie petitioner for grant of two ^ 21-09-1974 issued by the State of] facts pleaded in the petition within a| i^ above, this petiUon is finally disposed off apthorities to consider and decide the claim ^dvance incremente as per ctrcular dated [Madhya Pradesh, after verification of the period of eightweeks from today. Sd./- Manmdra Mohan Steivaslava Judge «ti!^l<"l4l-l ^WvS 4 fttA <fa(dl< •^siSOTsn^i [w M