^i^S^^^^ 1 y. .%, ^£n. ..,.n^ft-.."'«^:>&;w" 8 8 C>HW i^'^'^.l ^a.-'P'PS^^^ . ^Ui BEFORE _^E_HON( BL E STATE ADMIKISTRATIVE TRIBUN^ ^BENCH RAXPUR •O.A .No._2000 ^j^ C'^) I <-< "^ <? /c; .^ APH, ICANT NOH-APH.ICANTS . Ravlndra Kumar Sahu Aged 35 years.^ scn of , Shrl Ramlal Sahu, Upper Divislon Teacher Govt.Glrls' Higher Secondary School, Dhamtari ^ V/S ,. 1. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary . - ]&2ucation ^epartm it, Govt.of Chhattisgarh^ Sasret^riat, Raipur (M.P.). 2, District Education Officer, Dhamtari. 3^ Frlncipal^ Govt. GArls' Higher Secondary School^ DharAari^Dlstt. Dhamtari, Appllcation u/s 19 of the Adininlstratj.ve Trlbunal A;tl985 :^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Ptetitfoner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitkiner Respondents Petitioncr Respondents Petitioner Respondeuts Ptetitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitfoner Respondente Petitioner Rcapondcuts W. P. fsl No. 3208 of2005 Ku. Shaflja Shrivastava Versus The State ofChhattisgaifa & othcra W. P. (sl No. 3479 of2005 Raviadra Kumar Sahu Vcrsus Thc State of Clihattisgarh & ofhera W. P. fsl No. 4176 of2Q^> Versus Premlal Dewangan : The State of Chliattisgarh & anothcr W. P. (s) No. 4301 of2005 : Ram KuxnaT Cboubey Versus : ThcStateofChIiattisgarh&another W. P. fol No. 4308 of2005 : Kashi Ram Shrivas Versus : The State of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. t3} No. 4343 of2005 Shaka Ram Songerwa Vcrsus ; State of Chhatte^arh & anoflicr W. P. fet No. 4344 of2005 Neshwar Prasad Sahu Versus : The State ofChhattfsgarh & aaother W. P. fel No. 4357 of2005 : Rupendra Kumar Sahu Vcrsus t Thc State of Chhattisgarh & aaofher W. P. fs) No. 4367 of 2005 : Ledadhar Sahoo Vcraus The State ofChh^tisgarh & aDothier x3iSE.~-:t. Petitioner Respondents Pfetitioner Respondents Pfetitionar Respondents Ptetitioncr Respondcnts Petitfoner Respondents h Pel|k>ncr Respondents Pfetitmner Respondcnts Petitioner Rcspondcnts Ptetitioner Rcspondenta W. P. fsl No. 4416 of2005 : Smt Aruna Reddi Versus . : Ttoe State of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. (sl No. 4438 of2005 : Smt Bhagwati Vaishnava Versus : The State of Chhattisgarh & ofhera W. P. is\ No. 4615 of2005 : Gopal Singh KoMaa Vcraus The State of Chhattis^rh & anothcr W. P. jfsl No. 4626 of2005 :f ' . : Smt Vibha Verma Vcrsus ; The State of Chhattiisgarh A anotfacr W. P. fol No. 4659 of2005 : Suresh KumarTiwari ^ Versus : The State of Chhattisgarh & axiofh.er W. P. fsl No. 4690 of2005 : Hcinraj Ladeshwar Versus The State ofChhattisgarh & anofher W. P. fel No. 4696 of2005 : Manik Lal Dewangan Versus ; Thc State of Chhattfsgarh & anofhcr W. P. fol No. 4810 of2005 Versus RraniTin Ji Dewangan Thc State of Chhattisgsuli & aaothcr And W. P. fol No. 5886 of2006 Vcrsus Amar Sm^jpi Dewangan Thc State of Chhatdsgarh & anotfaer SIn^e Bcnch: HoaT)]e Mr. Justice Batteh K. Agnlhotrl. 1 Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for fhc Pctitioncrs. Shri V.V.S. Moorfhy, Deputy Advocate Generalwith Smt Anju Ahuja, Dcpuly Gcwcmmcnt Advocate for fhc State/rcspondeats. ORDER (31rt0ctobcr,2006) 1. The petittoncra are working as Assistant Teachers/Uppcr Divisk>n Teachcrs in fhe govemment schools. In fhe course oftheir aervices as Assistant Teachera/Upper I^ivisron Teachera, the petitfa>nera have obtained B. Ed./B.T.I. exammatioa certiffcates on their own cxpenses beforc 1.3.1999. 2. Writ Ptetition (S) No.s 3208/2005, 3479/2005, 4176/2005, 4301/2005, 4308/2005, 4343/2005, 4344/2005, 4357/2005, 4367/2005, 4416/2005, 4438/2005, 4615/2005, 4626/2005, 4659/2005, 4690/2005, 4696/2005, 4810/2005 and 5886/2006 are being disposed of by this common order as fhe facts and questfon oflaw iavolved in fhese pettdon^ are coinmon. 3. Accordiag to leamed counsel for fhe pctitionera, the pctitionera arc entitted to twro advance increments ia view of fhe decisk>n of fhis Court in fhe case of Ydshwant Kumar Bharadwai Vs, M^^"k?ipal Corporation. Durg cuad cmofher {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kuiaar Bharadwaj Vs. Mumcipal Corporation, Durg gnd anofher (Supra), came to fl|ie conclusion that titie teachers, who had obtained B. Ed./B.T.I. Exammation Certificate on fheir OWB expenses, are coveied by the circiilar dated 24.12.98 issued by fhe State Goverament of Madhya Pradesh. 4. Furthcr m fhe matter of Smt Manorama Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and otfaere { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } the Madhya Pradcsh State Administrative TtAunal, Gwalior Bench, while considenng the circular dated 1.3.1999 whcrein, it is provided that fhe Assistant Teachere, who have ocqwrcd B. Ed. degree at fheir own cost betwcen 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shaU bc eiititlcd to two ddvance mcrcmcnts, relicd on decision in the casc of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Statc of M.P. & othera passed m 0,A. No. 8. 1632/99, dccided on 12.10.1999 whcrem it is obscrvcd that tfae circular d&ted 1.3.1999 caxuiot be made applicabte retrospectivety. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtaijaed B- Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entifted to two advaace increments, f It is poiated out by learacd counscl appearing for fhe petitk>ners that fhe then State ofMadIiya Pnadesh had ffled a Special Leave Ptetition agajnst fhe ordera passed by the Tribunal and fhe Hon^ble Supreme Court dismissed Spccial Leave Pfctitk>n No. 1999/2000 fikd against the order ofthe TribunaL Thereforc, fhe dircction to fhe effect fhat the circular dated 1.3.1999 caxinot be made appMcable retoospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becomes final and tfae sanie shall be applicablc to att fhe Assistant Teachers who have obtaiaed B. Ed. exaxnination certificate bcfore 1.3.1999. It is furfher substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issucd by fhe present State of Madhya Pipdesh wherein fhe circular clearty states about the decisk>n ofthe Suprcme Court. Learaed coiuisel for ftie petitioners furfher submits that fhe facts and question of law involved ia fhe prcsent case are squarety covercd by decision of fhis Court in fhe case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Muiiicipal Corporafton, Durg aad anofher (Suprc^, to which leamed coiinsel appearmg for the respondents fiairty conc^des and agrees with the avennent made by leanied counsel appeanng for fhe pctitfoners. Acconlmigfy, fhe writ pctitions are aUowed in tcrms of fhe order passed m fhe case of Yashwaat Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Mumcipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supre^, subject to verification of fhe fact as td whefher fhe petitionera have acquired B. Ed./B.T.I. Exammation Certificate on their own expenses as per fhe circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and ftirther whether fhey have bcen paid two advance mcrcments pr not No order as to costs. A copy offhis oider be placed on record ia connected matters, SubhasM Sd7- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 0