yy> i ‘ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGA .H AT BISPR LAU WRIT PETITION (S) No. 382 of 2009 I V r x PETITIONER : Surendra Prasad G lpté s/o Shri Umesh Prasad Gupta, Aged abou 43 years Narvadapara, Nonh Amblkapu Amblkapur Dlstrlct Satguja Chhattlsga h R§SPONDENTS :1. State of Chhattlsg’arh Through Secretary VERSUS School Educatlon Départment Mmlstry D K S Bhawan Raxpur Chhattlsgarh - 2. The Dlstnct Education Oificer Amblkapur Dxstnct Amblkapur (Sarguga) Chhat‘tlsgarh 3. The Block Educahon OEcei Amblkapur D1str1ct Amblkapur (Sarguga) Chhamsgarh WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB Hon’ble Shn Satlsh K Agmhotrl, Present ‘ hrl C Jayant K Rao Advocate for the petltloner Shn Y S Thakur Deputy Advocate Genera] for the State/respondents ORAL ORDER ' (Passed on 16m day of February, 2009) ' _; With the consent of learned counsel appearmg for the pames the mattel 5' J 1siheard finally ' IA No l Thls 1s an apphcatlon for takmg documents on record The _ appllcanon 1s ordered as prayed for Learned counsel appearmg for the petitioner submits that the petitioner; list entitled to grant of two increments as he has obtained D.Ed.f ‘ certificate on his own expenses during the service period. Learned L oofunsel iinther submits that the petitioner may be granted liberty to7 l ‘ make a representation to the, authorities for gantof two increments" l pdrsuant to the judgment and order passed by this Court in the matter of ' Yashwam Kumar Bharadwa] v Mumcrpal Corporation Durg andf arotherl and W P (S ) No 4130 of 2005 Gapesh Kumar Verma vs The State Govt ofChhamsgarh and another if r L t 1 i006 (In MPJR CG 96 \\. The Sfate Govamment is under an ob igatipii to follow tho law settled by this Couxt and it is notnecessary to approach this Court by each and t every employee when the law hos already been settled by this Couxt. The employees, who are similarly situlted and have not approached the Court; may be treated at par with other employees, who have approached this Court. It is not necessary to approach this Court for similar order. I § In View of the foregoing reasons; this petition stands disposed cf with liberty reserved’to the petitioner, on the request of learned counsel, to make a representation. Ifthe representation is filed by the petitioner, the isame mav be considered and decided, in accordance] yvith law on its main Lmerit as expeditiously as nossrble preferablv Within a neriod of eight i weeks from the date of receipt ofthe representatmnkd__..’—— v Sd/— ’ 7 sh K. Agmhot , ‘ ‘ Jg ‘ ‘ , — ‘ 5at1 rl _ l \ _ ude \ #l