-<' €^r% IN THE mOH GOUm' OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRTT PETmON (S1 N0. __6^_ _i2QW PETITIONER RESPONDENTS ^-"-^'N>i" y:-' Smt. Hermina Tigga, aged about 4^,years, wife pf Shn James Tigga, 9'occupatipn - Upper Division Teache^povemment Boys Higher Secondafy SchOol, Patthalgaon Distt. Jashpur (CG) VERSUg 1.'^ Stale of Chhattisgarh, througU - Seeretajy, Departtne.nt Qf 'I'nbal Welfare, Dau Kalyari Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) L . .'; - ... 2. * Assistant Commissioner, Deptt of Tribal WeHare, Distt. JashpurfC.G.) ^". ' 3. Principal, Goveminent Boys Higher Secondaj'y SGMool, Patthalgaoa- Distt. Jashpur (CG) WRITPETITION U/A226 OFTHECONSTITUTIONOPINDIA, •^. HiGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER WRiT PETITiON (S) N0.680 OF 2010 Smt. Hermina Tigga Petition Sinate State of Chhattisgarh & Others Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India] 'bie Shri Satish K. Aanihotri, J. Present:- ShriA.N. Shri N.N. Roy, Panei Lawyerforthe State. ORDER(ORAU (Passed on this 15 day of February, 2010) ^\ fith the consent of iearned counsel appearing for the parties, 2) the peiition is heard finaily iy this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction respondents to pay two advance increments from tt passing of B.Ed examination, on her own expenses, before enterina into service. 3) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits issue involved in the present case is no tonger res integrs as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State ofM.P. & Ors. as weii as by this Court in Yashv^ant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Munidpal CorporaSon, Durg and another and Gopesh Kumar Verma '/. The State Govt. of ChhatSsgarh andanothe^. 1 2009 (!il) IV.PJR (SC$ 59 22006(li)IViPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.41300f2005 .as 7' 4) Learned counsei further submits that the instant squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, petitioner maybe permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the iigiht of aforeslated decisions, subject to verification of the facts. 5) Learnedcounsei appearing for the State submits that jn the event, the petitioner makes a representation; the same vi/iil be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) as well asthis Coitrt in Yashwant Kumar Bharadivsj (supra) Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a peribd of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearina for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingiy, the writ petition is disposed of. Govi/ri Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge