$§m page N O . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATUE R AT BILASPR U (C.G.) écV/W Gautam Sai S/ O Shri Heta Ram Sai, Aged 41 years, Working as U.D.T. Govt. Higher Secondary School Kotba, R/o Bokhi, Post— Pandripani Tehsil Kunkuri. Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS . State of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary, Department of Education, Mantralaya D . K. S. Raipur (C.G.) . District Education officer, i District Jashpur (C.G.) PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226 22? OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRITS OF MANDAMUS AND CERTIORARI AND FOR OTHER SUITABLE WRITS AND DIRECTIONS:- 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONERS: ® 5: E§ w.P. No ........................ [2006 PETITIONER: HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I'FISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. No. 6940 of2006 Peiiu‘oner k @1 Respondenis Gautam Sai Vmsus Respondents : ' Stat: of Chham'sgath 85 annther W. P. No. 6941 d2006 Peu'tioner : Shyam Sngh Paikara Vérsus : State of Ghhattisgath & another W. P. No. 6942 of 2006 Petitioner : Dilhmr-m Lal Sahu Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & angnher SMe Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Jusu‘ce mh K. Agnihotti. Shri Rahul Jha, Advocate for thc Pctin'oncrs. Shri Arun Sao, Govt. Advocate for the State] respondents. ORDE-R (Passed on this 13¢ day of Decemher, 2%) Di The petitioners are working as Upper Division Teachers/Assismnt Teachers in the govemmentv schools. In the course oftheir services as Upper Division Teachers/Assistant Teachers, the petih'oners have obtained B.Ed.]B.T.I. examination oerh'ncates on their own expenses before 1.3. 1999. Writ Petition No.3 6940/2006, 6941/2006 and 6942/2006 ale being disposed of by this common order as the tacts and quesh'on of law involved in these peiitions are common. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petin'oners are entitled to two advance increments in View of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (ll) MPJR-CG 96}. A Thiq Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bhamrlwaj Vs. Municipal Corporatiom Durg and another (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed. /B.T.L Examination Certiiicate on their own expenses, am covemd by the circular dated 24.12.98 (Annexure P17) issued hy the State Government of Madhya Pladesh. Further in the matter of Smt. Manorama Shrivasmva Vs. State of M.P. and others { 2000 (1] M.P.L.S.R. 136 } the Madhya Pradesh State Adminjsnative Tn'bunal, Gwalior Bench, while considen'ng the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherein, it is pmvided that the Assistant Teachers, who have acquired B.Ed. degree at their own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shall he entitled to two advance increments, relied on decision in the case of Rakesh Knmar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. & others passed in O.A.No. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999 whexein it is observed that the circular dated 1.3. 1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advance increments. It is pointed out by leamed counsel appearing for the pen'h’oners that the then State of Madhya Pradesh had hled a Special Leave Petih'on against the orders passed by the Tribunal and the Hon’ble Supleine Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 med against the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the edect that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becomes hnal and the same shall be applicable to all the Assistant Teachers who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. examination ceililicate before k w% @ 1.3.1999. !t is further substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the pmsent State of Madhya Pmdesh wherein the circular clearly states about the decision of the Supmmc Couxt. Learned counsel for the peu'tioners further suhnn'ts that the facts and quesu'on of Jaw involved in the present case are squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of \Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), to which learned counsel appearing for the msponden$ fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petiu'ons are allowed in terms of the onler passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to ve T ation of the fact as to Whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed./B.'l‘.l. Examination Cer tilicate on their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further Whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. A copy of this order be placed on record ofconnected matters. Sd/- Thakur Satish K. Agnilxotri Judge