(1/ C £74321, ® $§§§$§WE ENCH Ln the H0nble High Court 0f Judicature o_f Chhattishgarh a_t Bllasgur (C.G.) Tribal Welfare Department Ministry, OOQ" D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) g )&qgg/ V I F69¢$ /2 The Dlstrict Educatlon RaJnandgaon Officer (C.G.) Mohala 1‘ w Black Cduatiloi’) O’CF'CU" © ll $V l o» - Mam/act Dish Rajmwdyom ‘ Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 l the Canvntutton J Indm Fl 0r the Issuance _f WRIF m the nature J MA/VDA Mt S (emmau Pro/ubmrm and for Other lSuItable writ or Wilts, art/e: 01 elders I)” ectmn 0r Direc twm Petitioner /Shrimati Pingla Mandavi, aged 38 years wife 0f Shri Pal $il‘1ggl9MandaVi, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Teacher, Primary SchooL Village Kumhali, Tribal Block Mohala, District Rajnandgoan (C.G.) Versus Resgondents (/1. The State Government of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILAsPUR W. P. (s) No. 4787 of 2006 Pe‘rifiorier- : Shrimafi Pingla Mundavi Versus Shri Ajay Shrivasfava, Advoca're for The Pe+i+ionen Shri Safish Gup‘l'a, DepuTy Governmen‘l' Advocate for The respondenfs/S'fafe. ORDER (5* Septemtger, 2006) lmmed counsel appearing for The pefifioner' submifs fha'l' while working as Assis‘l'anf Teacher, 'Hjle pefifioner has gone on‘ +raining 'ro improve his qualificn'rions on his own expenses and acquired B.T.I. Cer'l'ificnfe in The year 1992 from The Board of Secondary Eduoa'rion, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal. According To learned counsel for 'l'he pefi'l’ioner, fhe pel'i‘l'ioner is enfi'rled 1'0 two advance incremenfs in view of ‘rhe decision of fhis Cour-r in 'i’he case of Yashwanf Kumor Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporafion, Durg and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. Responden'rs : The State of Chha-Hisgarh & ofhers Single Bench: Hon‘ble Mr. Jusfice Safish K. Agnihafri. “2/ Learned counsel for The pefifioner- further submi'rs Thai 1'he facfs and quesfion of law involve in fhe present case are squarely covered by decision of 'i'his Courf in fhe case of Yashwanf Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporafion, Durg and anofher (Supra), 'ro which learned counsel appearing for 1'he respondenfs fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Vashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra). No order as to costs. t "f‘HMM(.Meewm-wwwW ‘ ‘y l i l ‘a Sd/— Salish K. Agnihotr i Judge t i l i