qvr ¢ mm \ / Q‘fawmgIfwm / J 3%%§L£ REWW C/fr’ (ari IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. s No. é92‘ /2o1o PETITIONER /: Mo‘ri Ram Anchal, S/o Lafe Shr'i Bhojr'am, aged abouT 41 year's, Upper Division Teacher, Gov’r. Middle School, Pachori, Block— Bamhnidih, Disfi. Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS / : 1. State of ChhaTTisgarh Through :- The Secre‘rary, School Education Departmen‘r,’ D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Dis’rr'ic’r Educa’rion officer, Dis’r’r.— Janjgir-Champa C6.) /3. Block Education Officer, Block Bamhnidih, Dis’n‘. Janjgir— Champa (6.6.) / WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA . é \ {v Amit HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 6924 of 2010 PETITIONER : Moti Ram Anchal. ' VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SB: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri A.S.Rajput, Advocate for the petitioner. INDIA Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. for the State/respondents. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 29'“ day of November, 2010) 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments on passing of B.T.l. examination, on his own expenses, before entering into service. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State ofMP. & Ors.’ as well as by this Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj V. Mun/c/pa/ Corporaf/bn, Durg & anotheF and Gopesh ' Kumar l/erma v. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another? . 3. Learned counsel further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the respondent authorities to decide his case for grant of two increments in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification of the fact asto whether the petitioner have acquired B.T.l. certificate on their own expenses before entering into service. 4. Learned counsel appearing fornthe State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner/make? a‘Trepresentation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena (supra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwajand Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. ln view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Satish K. Agnihotrilv Sd/- Judge K 1 2009 (III) MPJR (so) 59 2 2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96 3 WP(s) No. 4130 of2005