Writ Appeal No.407/2011 14.9.2011 We have heard both sides. This is a writ appeal against the final order dated 15-12-2010 passed in W.P. No. 6252/2010. The learned Single Judge committed a factual mistake in paragraph 4 of the impugned judgment, wherein it has been written that the petitioner acquired the educational qualification of D.Ed. before entering into service of the respondents. Apparently, this mistake arose because the petitioner has claimed this fact in his letter dated 2-6-2009 (Annexure-P/3). This was a mis- statement made by the petitioner in his letter aforesaid. Annexure-P/4 is the mark-sheet of D.Ed. Examination 2007 which the petitioner has passed. The writ-petitioner entered into service of the respondents in 1998. If the petitioner had passed the D.Ed. Examination prior to entering into the service of the respondents, there would be no occasion for him to appear in the same examination in the year 2007. Therefore, the learned Single Judge has been misled by mis- statement of the writ petitioner in his application dated 2-6-2009. The two advance increments were payable to the employees only if they acquired the qualification aforesaid. Thus, obviously the increments would become payable after the requisite qualification was acquired and not before that. The petitioner/respondent had claimed two advance increments from 1999 although he had not acquired the requisite qualification till 2007. In view of this, the impugned order of the learned Single Judge is modified to the extent that the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of the two advance increments and consequent arrears only after the date he acquired the requisite qualification and not for the period prior to that date. The writ appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid modification. (Sushil Harkauli) (K.K. Trivedi) Acting Chief Justice Judge ac/AK 1