(^J HSGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH: BILASPUR Writ Petition (S) No, 3828 of 2607 PETiTiONER RESPONDENTS V&rsus 1) 3) Rajendra Kumar Mahant, S/o. Pran Bandhu Mahant, ^ed about - 37 yeare, Assistant Teacher Primary Schoo! Tilgi, Biock - Pussoure, District - Raigarh (CG) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Schoo! Education Departmsnt, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, CG. The District Education Officer, Raigarh, DistrictRaigarh, (CG). The Biock Education Otficer, Block Pussour, District ~ Rasgarh (CG). ...., ^ (Writ Petition under Articte 226 ofthe Constitution of tndiaj SB: Hon'bie Mr. Justlce Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Shri Sanjay Pstei, cpunse! for the petitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocate Tor the State. (Passed on 11th Juiy, 2007) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as weii as for the State/respondents jointiy submit that the fact and question of law involved in the oresent wrif Detition are the same to thaf of in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. MunicipaS Corporation, Durg and another { 2006 (il) MPJR -CG 96}, which hss been disposed of vide order dated 3-4-2006. Learned counsel appearlng for the resoondents does not controvert the said submission. ^^ ^ f ^ In subsequent cases, i.e., Writ Petition (S) No. 4139 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma Vs. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and anotherl and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-12-2006, pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995, issued by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, BhopaS and the prospectus of Dipioma in Education Examination, it was ciarified t'nat the nomenciature of t'ne Basic Training institute i.e., B.T.i., has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Certificate hoiders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (S) No. 4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verms V's. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another (supra). Accordingly, the v/rit petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwa] Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whethsr the petitioner has acqulred D.Ed. Examination Certfficate on his own expenses as per the cireulars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-19^ and further whet'ner he has been pasd two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Raju 1