sN^W^ <^\^^_ IN THE HON'BLE HI&H COUR'T OR CHMATTIS6ARH AT BiLAsPUR rc.e.y W.P.l^tW ^h'^ /20i0 PETITIONER uj:u, Tr; ^i^ ^'Lr.-5.'<v.-:""' ' .a<PF.'ff1.^"' ^^'•' y Smt. Janki Tamr'akar W/d Shri Manohar lal Tamr'akar, Aged aboy},. 59 ;_years, , Princtpal Pt. ^11^.^^/ M^huld^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Secondgry School, Bilaspur', &istt. Bilaspur(G.6.) o-.- ^°f ^&&'^•••' RESPONDENTS : VERSUS 1. 'State of Chhattisgai-h • Thr'ough Secretary, Urbdnadministratioriand clevelopment Depart-ment \ D.K.S. Bhawan,Raipur (C.6.) 2^ ; Ghie-fMunicipal Officer, Municiptil Corpordtiori, Bilaspur :(C.GO^:':,-..::..:::':.^':..^ WRIT PETITION U/A 2Z6/227 OF TI-IE CONSTETOTION OFINt)M The petitioner named above most respec't'fully begs t6 subfnit as under:- :', • ' '.. - ; ' :,' '"'; ' : ': ,: :• ,', 1. PARTICULARSOFtHEPETITIONER As stated above iri fhe cause title. 2. PARTICULARSOFTMERESPONbENTS As statedabove in thecause title. &~~aa aBaa-BiSMSBB|^^gSgS2^^^^^ %3^ :!-:fc'i. i^...:ii XI-HC—78 *ii*<wr 9i«irai d-cci "4i<<i<n<<, ®iilyi(o,fsiciwy . \^(p-a^) ^-G^^l Co ••"^200 STI^T'q^T (lj°li^«(<^T) an^rv Rs'-iw ^V sn^r ai^i^ <v '^ TOiiw^itesni^r SB : HOBf'BLE MR. JUSTICB PRttTINKER DIWAKER 30.11.2010 q^fCT'ih •WRlf •?ftt^ TfW?R ^'sTRnan^r Shri K.S.Pawar, counsel fo: Shri Vivek Shanna, P.L, fof fiie State. Counsel for fhe petitioner enti.fted to benefit of two advande increiaents on account of he havuig passed B.Ed. exauLmatto.^ own cost. It is subinitted tb.at ft| petition is no longer res integra\ b fhe petitioner. subinits fhat fbe petitioner is decided by fhe Hou'ble Supreajte Court ia the case of Asha Saxena Vs. State ef M.P. & Ors It is further submitted th, ^ before her appoiatment at her 'e issue in.volved in. tfae present and fhe saine has been GsaRv 2009 (IIIJMPJR (SC| 59. rt this Couirt has also taken a similar view in its order dated (i.2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6257/2008. Coiuisel for fhe pet(tioner furtlier subtaits fhat the order dated 29.4.2010 passed [a Writ Appeal N0. 124/2009, wherein relying upon the judgm^nt ofthe Supreine Court in fhe case ofAsha Saxena (supra) ancj ia aaother Writ Appeal No. 1 the order passed by fhis Court 7!'2009, directions have been issued for consideration of fhe| case for grant of two advatEce incrtments as per circular date(|l 21.9.1974 issued by ttie State of Madhva PTadesh, after verificbtiou of fhe facts pleaded in. fhe petition. Counsel for the State subtiits that case ofthe petitioaers would also be considered on fhd saoie luaes; + '%, 1 ^ .-" ^ -J.'^^' ^ sges^ XI-HC—78 ^"^ r<<l<<l<yl-4, »tI1^'l6, fs|<?)iy^< *!1*1WI <JKfWf> "^ 200 ®n^TT!^7('yf-i'i'^r) antw Vl R;-)i<* WIT 3»I^Tslpqjqi 'reiTw ^tfw aii^i In view of above, fh.e -p direction to the respondent auth petitioner for grant of two adva dated 21.9.1974 issued by fhe venfication of the facts pleaded eightweeks froni todav. It is inade clear fhat this opinion. on inerifs of the case would be at liberty to decide ti with law. itition is disposed of with a jarities to decide ffae claim of fhe dice iacicinents as per circular ptate of Madhya Pradesh after ^i the petition wifhia a period of Court has not expressed aay and fhe authoritv' concemed ^e same stricUy in accordance CM<i[<n«4li'RPMf ^f fe^ Tf^+^l< ^? sifiitT SD^T Sd/- Pntinker Diwakar ^ - Judge