/** /c. C 7^'f oro' (2) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S} NO.'714^3 /2006 PETITIONER .4 ^^^€ .**''' .••••••^v&--' .\<^ "V'7<v s?-" r^>... A^-" RESPONDENTS ^*.o .J Ku. Rita Pandey (Now- Smt. Rita Mishra) W/o Shri R. Mishra Age about 39years, Asstt.Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Shitlapara, Kanker, Distt. - Kanker (C.G.) VERSUS StateGovt. ofChhattisgarh Through: Secretary, School Education Department Ministry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer Kanker(C.G.) Block Education Officer Kanker(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA s-i 4 Al,i:5-* HI6H COURT OF CHHATHS6ARH AT BILASPUR SIN6LE BENCH : HON'BLE MR SATISH K. A6NIHOTRI. J. PetH'ioner WRTT PETmON CS.) N0.7125 OF 2006 Ku. SavitaSoni versus Resbondents State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh and cnother Petitioner WRTT pETrraoN (5.) NO 7126 OF 2005 Smt.JanakNandini Siarma verais Rea)ondents The State Sovemment of Chhatt'isgarh <md another Petitioner WRTT pFrmoN fs.) N0.7127 OF 2006 Pramod Kumar Pou-akh versus Reaaondents Petitioner State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh cmd another And WRFT pFrrraoN rs.»NO 7143 OF 2006 fo. Ritoi Pandey (Now-Smt. Rita Mishra versus Resbondents State 6ovt. of Chhnttisgarh and others Presenit- : Mr.AjayShrivastava.counselforthepetitioners. Miss Sunj'ta Jain, Panel lawyer for the State/ respondents. O R D E R (Rassed on -this 21 dttf of ttecember, 2006) 1. llearned counsel oppearing for the petitioners as also for the Sta'te/respondents jointly submit that the facts and que^tion of Ipw involved in thepresent writ petitions are squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of yashiraiit Kumw Bhwadw^ vs. Mwsie^al Capawl^en, t>wy wid aneliw^. 2. ffor the aforementioned reasons, the writ petitions are diqio%d ?f in terms of the decision of this Court- in the matter of )ypra),subjectto verification ofthe fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B. Ed. Certificates at their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 andfurther whether they have been paid two adyance increments or not. No order as to costs. 3. A copy of this order be placed on the record of the connected ^rjt petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1 2006CTDMPJR-C696 Bablu O R DE R (Ptesed on -this 2llt dny of Deoember, 2006) 1. tleamed counsel cppearing for the petitioners as also for the State/respondents jointly submit that the facts and question of Ipw involved in the present writ petitions are squarely covered by the cfecision of this Courl' in the case of yashwanf' Kumev BhtwadweJ vs. Mwiteyal Ca'ywatiwi, t>wy and aiwiiw^. 2, Ifor the aforementioned reasons, the writ petitions are di^po^d in terms of the decteion of this Court- in the matter of Yashwani-Kumar BhaivdviK{/^Svfira^, subjectto verification ofthe s ' ^ • , ' • fact as towhether the petitioners hwe acquired 3. Ed. Cert'ificates at their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 andfurther whether they hwe been pajd two advonce increments or not. Np order as to costs. Bablu 3. A copy of -this order be placed on the record of •riiie connected i^rjt petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 1 2006ffI)MPJR-C696