e^-K^9- C!illli^' IRVI IN THEHON'BLEHIGHCOURT OF CHHATTISGA^H AT BILASPUR W.P.lStNO. \^^ /2010 PETITIONER 0'^ ^ .^^^r A^w'"^ ^:r'M^' ^^w ^••••'yy •^- y€"^ RESPONDENTS A Shanti Hansara, D/o Late Shri Johan Hansara, aged about 50 years, working as Head Master, Govt. Primary School Upar Kachhar, Block- Parshabahar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VER^US : 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. " Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Jashpur, Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Block - Pharshabahar Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.) 4. Treasury Officer, Treasury Account & Pension Jashpur, Distt.-Jashpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.1850 OF 2010 PETITIONER Shanti Hansara RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State. ORDER(ORAL) (Passed on this 22nd day ofApril, 2010) 1) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respbndents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of B.Ed. examination, on her own expenses, before entering in 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 of M.P. & Ors.1 as well as by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another^ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and anotheP. 3) Learned counsel further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decisions (supra). Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide her case in the light of aforestated decisions, subject to verification of the facts. 1 2009 (III) MPJR (SC) 59 2 2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005 ^65a^?S (^ 1 :L ^ ^ 1 t^S'T-T"^-"'!i!^ ff Arun 4) Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that jn the event, the petitioner makes representations, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj (supra) and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of six weeks from the date ofreceipt of the representation. 5) In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 6) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. t^^ ^y