i.1ffl, ".<% w ^nnfl*5-'>:.*';"";l]'''':'i''< /f ^ ...***'.. •: ^•?:^J&" -..^€^" .-••""—»><§v>y'"" (2) Before Hoh'ble HidhCourtofChhattisaarhatBilasDur ..^^^•'"'"'''1 ,:: ^^I.OT^ -.^-^. • ' ; • ~ ^ !. •: '1;:: Writ Petition (SlNoMl^ /2008 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS .JC^< ?^J^ ^' BalRamJha S/6 Late Shri Baijnath Jha Age aboyt SSyears, Headmaster, Janpad PrimarySchool, Barkai, Block - Makdi, Distt. - Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State Govt. ofChhattisgarh Through: Secretary, EducatiQn&TnbalDepartment D.K.S.Bhavan,Raipur(C.G.) y. DistrictEducationOfficer Bastar,Distt.-Bastar(C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Block-Makdi,Distt.-Bastar(C.G.) 4. Treasury, Account and Pension Distt.-Bastar(C.G.) WRITPETITIONUNDERARTICLE2260FTHE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA K-S^ ^•S'^S^-Sa;"®1!^^^^^^ s^i^-^^S€K^;^^SI^^£: ^"''wjwn HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPUR (Hon. Mr. JusticePritinkerDiwaker) Writ Petition (S) No. 2676 of 2008 PETITIONER BalRamJha VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of ChhattiS'garh and others (M' Shri Somkant Verma counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Smitha Ghai PL for respondents/State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER (11.11.2010) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has done BTC course at his own expenses before joining the service and in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the matter of Asha Saxena v. State of M.P. and others 2009 (III) MPJR (SC) 59 he is entitled for two advance increments. He further submits that at this stage the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to make a representation to respondent No.2. 2. Counsel for the respondents/State submits that due to inadvertence, incorrect return has been filed in the present case and therefore, she is not in a position to state as to whether the case of the petitioner who has done his BTC course is covered with the decision of the Supreme court in the matter of Asha Saxena (supra) or not. She however submits that she has no objection if the petitioner withdraws this petition and makes a representation to respondent No.2. According to the Stgte counsel, the representation so made by the petitioner would be decided by respondent No.2 in accordance with law after verification of the facts. 3. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid. If the petitioner makes a representation to respondent No.2 within a month from the date of receipt of copy of this order, it is expected to decide the same within a further period of four months from ,<8 its receipt, taking into consideration all aspects of the matter particularly the qualification ofthe petitioner i.e. BTC course. 4. This Court has not expressed any opinion on merit of the case and the authority concerned would be free to decide the representation ofthe petitioner strictly in accordance with law. -—— rf Pritinker Diwaker Judge 11\:)-0