^•""^•-^ .^C^(0Q ^>'.^;^.^-' ys--^ ^...- -^e0-"" IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR •S2-tt o WRITPETITION (S) NO............/2006 PETITIONER Smt. Vibha Sahu W/o Shri Sharad Chandra Sahu, aged about 41 years, Assistant Teacher posted at Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School Mungeli, Dist. BUaspur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS QO^ ^F 'y^)\^ >''-TL.,V; cv^"^ _v ^fl. ~^y VERSUS / 1. ^2. /3. /4. 5. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Director of School Education D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) Block Education Officer, MungeU Block-Mungeli, Dist. Bilaspur (C.G.) Principal Govt. Girls Higher Secondary School, Mi-mgeli, Block- Mugeli, Dist.Bilaspur (C.G.) -^ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE COUNSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CEERTIORARI. BffANDAMUS. PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, DIRECTIQN^R DIRECTIONS, ORDER OR ORDERES: ^ '^. HI6H COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT 8ILASPUR W. P.(s)No. 5410 of 2006 Petitioner Smt. Vibha 5ahu Versus Reqpondents State of Chhatt-isgarh <& others Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri R.S. Patel, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri V.V.S. OAoorthy, &y. Advocate Senera! wi-Hi Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. 6ovt. Advocate for -the respondents/S'tate. OR&ER Lth (6tn0ctober,2006) 1. Leamed counsel appear'mg for the petitioner submits that while working as Assistant Tecuher, -the petitioner has gone on troinmg to improve her quatifications on her own expenses and acquired B. Ed. Examination Certtficate on 30.1.1997 from Guru ^s Ghosidas Universily, Bitaqsur (Annexure P/2). According to leamed counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled •t'o two advcmce increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (EI) MPJR-C6 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant fomar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, &ur9 and another (Supra), came to the conclusion that •the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed. Examination Certificote on his own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by the State Sovemment of Madhya Pradesh 3. Leamed counsel for the petitioner further submits that the facts and question of law inwlved in the present cose are squarely coyered by decision of ihis Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipat Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), to which learned counsel appear'mg for the re^)ondents fairty concedes and agrees with the averment made by leamed counsel cqapearing for the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, +he writ petition is allowed in terms of 1tie order pas%d in the caseof Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, t>ur9 and another (Supro), subject to verification of +he fact as to whether the petitioner has acquired B. Ed. Examinort-ion Certificate on her own expenses or not. No order as to costs. ^ SA'- Satish KAgnihotri Judge Thakup