s C^ 1^7 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.fS) N0. f ^ /201^ PETITIONER : ^ Smt. Sheela Soni W/o Shri Milan Soni ,Aged about 40 years, Medial school Chuiehuwa , Block- Pali,Distt: Korba (C.G) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : ^l. State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur. Distt. Raipur (C.G.) -2. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Korba, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare, Pali, Distt. Korba (C.G.) 4. Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Distt. Korba (C.G.) ..<•<>•'' V<9C> ^y ^y ,<"^?y" y^ ^ WRIT PETITION U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ••<', '•A,. 23) H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BiLASPUR WRIT PET!TION (S) N0.17 OF 2011 Versus Smt. Sheela Soni State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 ofthe Constitutionof India) Single Bench : Hon'bie Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Deepak Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govemment Advocate for the State. ORDER (ORAU (Passed on this 6 day of January, 2011) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Detitioner is entitled to benefrt of two advance increments on account of the Tact that she has passed BTI examination before her appointment at her own cost. It is submltted that the issue invoived in the present petitlon is no longer res intagra and the same has been finally decided bythe Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State of M.P. & Ors.'. 2. it is further submitted that this C.ourt has aiso taken a simiiar vlew in its order datsd 6-2-2009 passed in W.P. (S) No.6257 of 2008. Learned counse! further submits that the order dated 29-4-2010 passed in W.A.No.124 of 2009 wherein reiying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another W.A.No.87/2009, djrections have been issued for consideraiion of the case for grant of frwo advance increments as per the cireular dated 21-9-1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verification ofthe facts pieaded in the petition. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the case of the petitioner would also be considered on the same lines. 4. ln view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a direction to the resDondent authorities to decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments as per the circular dated 21-9-1974 issued by-the State of Madhya Pradesh after verificaiion of the facts pleaded in the petition within a period of 8 weeks from today. - -.. - 1200§(ill)MPJR(SC)59 Sd/- Satish K. Agaihotri Judge