s^s^ v;s^Miiii ID the Honble Hish Court of Chhattishearh at Bilaspur (C.G.) W.P.(S) No. _fg^^ 2006 Petitioner ....................... Kunjlal Deshlahara Aged 46 years S/0 Shri Shiv Charan Deshlahara Assistant Teacher, Govt. primary School, Gureda District, Durg (C.G.) ^h-"":i9-a- }i>y^ ^•<^^F •s?..- s> ^* ^s^^^ \t6c'"A..--"" (>*-" Respondent... VERSUS 1. TheState Govemment of Chhattishgarh, Throughthe Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Block Education Officer,. Writ petition under articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India fpr issuance of writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, Certiorari, Prohibition and other suitable WRIT or writs, Order or orders, Direction or directions. <;S)"^oi^> ^i-y-^ XI-HC-78 •sn^TwR-iW dW 3TR5T SPTR' ;L;bhcsh 'r\^w^ -v ^^ ^7 *11*1CTI SH*1|tti g^HrpiTgq', (STflfl'is, (si<iit<^<. W,^,o^OT> S^S^fe^ W^ 200 .^ aii^ifl 4si* ('i^S^r) 5RrTaTHf?tr?n^?T 02.11.20Q6 ; Shri Ajay Shrjvcstavc, 4 Shri V.V.S. AAoorthy, Shri Utkorsh Verma, D^ StQTe/rsspondents. With the consent of Isl •Bi-it petition is heard 'finslly an| Comir.on order dictcted m open Court, fissssd ssporQtel vocots for the Petttionei-s. Deputy Advoeote Ssnerai with uty Sover'nment 'Advoccts for the 'ned counsei for the pQrties, 7 disposed of. n Writ Petition (S.) No.5887/2006 +l<l(ri<fl-1 'TORTf ff fS^S <Rl«K ^sri^Tan^T Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge P.T.O. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondeuts Petitioner Respondeuts Petitioner Respondeuts Petitioner Respondents W. P. (sl No. 5887 of2006 Gulab Singh Deshgiukh Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & an.ofhier W. P. (sl No. 5888 of2006 RatiRam Chandrakar Versus : The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5889 of2006 Onkar Lal Sahu Versus Thc State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 5890 of2006 Sint Manoraina Chandrakar Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5891 of2006 PanalalNetam Versus The State Govfc of Chhattisgarh & aaother W. P. (sl No. 5892 of 2006 BhanuRaia Khewar Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W, P. (slNo. 5893 of 2006 Jeewan Lal Dewangaa Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P, (s) Np^5894 of 2006 Kunjlal Deshlahara Versus The State Govt. ofChIiattisgarh & another W. P. (sli?o^5895 of 2006 Bansilal Keshriya Vcrsus Tbe State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & aaofher ^ W. P. (sl No. 5896 of2006 Petitioner : Sait. Ninnala Sahu Versus Respondents : The State Gtovt. of Chhattisgarh & another Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondeats Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitiouer Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W. P. (sl No. 5897 of2006 Smfc Sarswati. Chaadraker Versus The State Govt. of Chliattisgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5898 of2006 Tarachaud Matidavi Versus The State Govt. of ClLhatdsgarh & another W. P. (si No. 5899 of2006 Nand Lal Sahu Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 5900 of2006 Yogcshwar Kzimar Choudhaiy Vcrsus The State Govt. of Chliattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 5901 of2006 Kaushal Prasad Deshiaukh Versus The State Govt. ofCUiattisgarh & anofher W. P. (s\ No. 5902 of2006 Siuul Kiunar Dewangan Versus The State Govt. of Clihatdsgarh & anotfaer W. P. fsl No. 5903 of2006 Jeewaa Lal Chaadrakar Versus The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 5904 of 2006 Khilanand Sahu Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & aaother ^^- Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respoudeuts Petitioner Respondents Petituner Respondents Petitioner Rcspondente Petitioner Respoudents W. P. (sl No. 5905 of2006 Jagdish Ram DiUiwar Versus The State Govt of phhattisgarh & anofher W. P. (s) No. 5906 of 2006 Kuia. Suhasini Giribhal Versus The State Govt. of Chliattisgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5907 of 2006 Devi Sing Deshiaukh Versus The State Govt. of Chhatdsgarh & another W. P. ls\ No. 5908 of2006 Nareudra Kumar Deshuiiikh Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & anofher W. P. (sl No. 5909 of 2006 Ouiprakash Versus The State Ctovt. ofChhattisgarh & aaother W, P. (sl No. 5910 of 2006 Smt. Gouri Biwas Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & anofher W. P. (sl No. 5914 ofM06 Rudra Kuinar Angare Versus The State Govfc of Chhattisgarh & another W, P. (s) No. 5915 of2006 Deepak Kuniar Tiwari Versus The State Govt. of Chtaattisgarh & anofher W. P. (s) No. 5916 of2006 VishRam Singh Sahu. Versus The State Govt of Chhattisgarh & anofher \ 4 Petitioaer Respondents Pfetitioner Respoudeats Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondeute Petitioner Respondents Petitiouer Respoudents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W, P^(sl No. 5917 of 2006 Deeadayal Deshiauldi Versus The State Govt of Chhattisgarh & anofher W, P. (sl No.5918of2006 Makhau Lal Goutam Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W.P. (sl No.5919of2006 Ku. Sunita Deshmiikh Versus The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & another W, P, (s1 No. 5920 of 2006 TekRam. Dewaagaa Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5921 of2006 Raiaji Dillawar Versus The Slate Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 5922 of2006 Pan.ch Kuinar Sahu Versus The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & aaother W. P. fstNo. 5923 of 2006 Shankar Lal Chhcdaiya Vcrsus The State Govt of Chhattisgarh & anofher W. P. (sl No. 5924 of2006 Durvasa Raia Sahu Versus The State Govt. of Chhatdsgarh & another W. P. (s) No. 5925 of2006 Versus Siut. Sarita Deshinukh i The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another Aad W. P. (sl No. 5926 of 2006 Yiunau Lal Chaudraker PetitiDner : Versus Respoudeuts : The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & another Sia^te Beach: Hon'bk Mr. Justice Satish K. AgaUiotri. Preseut: Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri V.V.S. Moortliy, Deputy Advocate Gencral wifh Shri Utkarsh Verma, Dcpuly Govcnunent Advocate for fhe State/respoiidents. ORDER (2ndNovember, 2006) 1. The petitioners are working as Assistant Teachers in the govenunent schools. In the course of their serviccs as Assistant Teachers, fhe petitioners have obtaiaed B. Ed./B.T.I. examination certificates oa their own expenses before 1.3.1999. 2. Writ Ptetition (S) No.s 5887/2006, 5888/2006, 5889/2006, 5890/2006, 5891/2006, 5892/2006, 5893/2006, 5894/2006, 5895/2006, 5896/2006, 5897/2006, 5898/2006, 5899/2006, 5900/2006, 5901/2006, 5902/2006, 5903/2006, 5904/2006, 5905/2006, 5906/2006, 5907/2006, 5908/2006, 5909/2006, 5910/2006, 5914/2006, 5915/2006, 5916/2006, 5917/2006, 5918/2006, 5919/2006, 5920/2006, 5921/2006, 5922/2006, 5923/2006, 5924/2006, 5925/2006 and 5926/2006 are being disposed ofby this cominou order as fhe facts aud question oflaw involved in these petitions are conunon. 3. According to leamed counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advance increiuents in view of the decision of fhis Coiirt in the case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwai Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court ia the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Dvx^ asd auofher (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed./B.T.I. Exauiiuation Certificate on their own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by the State Govenunent of Madhya F^-adesh. ^ Further ia the uiatter of Smt. Manorama Shriyastava ^i. State of M.P. and othera { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } the Madbya Pradesh State Admuusteatiye Tribunal, Gwalior Bench, white consideriug the circular datcd 1.3.1999 whereia; it is provided that the Assistant Teachers, who have acquired B. Ed. degree at fheir own cost betweea 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shaU be entiflffd to two advance increinents, reUed on decisiou in the case of Rakesh Kuinar SIuivastava Vs. State ofM.P. & others passed iu O.A. No. 1632/99, deculed on 12.10.1999 wherein it is observed tfaat the circular dated 1.3.1999 canuot be made applicable retrospectively. Thus, a teacher, m.ay be Assistaat Teacher, who has obtauied B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advance increineuts. It is poiuted out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that fhe then State of Madhya Pradesh had ffled a Special Leave Petition ^ainst the orders passed by fhe Tribunal and the Hon'bte Supreme Court dismissed Special lcave Petition No. 1999/2000 filed agaiust the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the directi.on to the effect fhat the circular dated 1.3.1999 caaaot be made appUcable retrospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becoines final aad the same shall be appUcable to aU the Assistant Teachers who have obtained B. Ed. examiaatkin certificate before 1.3.1999. It is further substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State of Madhya Pradesh wherein fhe circiilar clearly states about the deciaiou of fhe Supreiue Court. Learaed counsel for fhe petitioners further subinits that fhe facts and question of law iavohred iu the present case are squarety covered by decision of tbis Court in fhe case of Yashwaat Kuniar Bharadwaj Vs. Miuucipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supr^, to wluch leamed coiuisel appeariag for the respondents fairly concedes and ^rees with fhe avennent made by teamed counsel appearmg for the petitioaeis. Acconlingly, the writ petitions are aUowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwaut Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Muuicipal Corporation, Durg and aaoftier (Supr^, subject to verification of the fact as to whefher the petitioners have acquired B. Ed./B.T.I. a8pnf uioqiugy -M qspeg -/PS •sjanBm p3»o3irao3m piooai uo pao.B[d aq japio siq»jo Adoo y •8 •S^SOO 0» SB JSpIO ON "^ov jo s^aaTOiaio.m aooBApB 0^4 pted naaq 3Aeq Asip jaipaqA jaipjig pm 6661 •E-T pro 866rerfrg pa»Bp sjBpia.do aip jad SB sasaadxa IUAO jiaqt ao afBogtpao noo^Bararexg tpmnns