%tm>$\_ 3INGLE BENCH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH w.P.(S) No. “gig /2o11 / PETITIONER : Smt. Kanchan Ghai W/o Shri Suresh Ghai, Aged about 48 years, Occupation — Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle Schooi Jone -2 Khursipar Bhilai Distt. Durg (CG). VERSUS 1./State of Chhattisgarh, Through — The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. / Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur /(C.G.) District Education Officer District Durg (CG) 3. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATT‘SGARH BILA$PUR SINGLE BENCH : HON’BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA J. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQN$TITUT!ON OF INDIA. Appearanc‘é: Shri Vipin Tiwari, counsel for petitioner. Shrl N. Naha Roy, Pane! Lawyer for the State‘ i’.’ ORAL ORDER (28101 [2011) Following oral order of the Court was pas3ed by Pra$hant Kumar Mom. iii Heard‘ (2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner oubmits that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of two advance increments on account of she having passed B.Ed. examination before her appointment at her own cost It is submitted that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res infegra and the same has been finally decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena vs. State of MP, & Ore" reported in 2009 (III) MPJR (SC) 59. (3) It is further submitted that this Court has also taken a similar view in its order dated 06/02/2009 passed in WP. (S) No. 6257 of 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws attention of this Court to order dated 29/04/2010 passed in Writ Appeal No. 124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Ashe iSaxena l (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another Writ (Appeal l No. 87/2009‘ directions have been issued for consideration of the case for grant of two advanoe increments as per circular dated §21/08/1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verification of ithe facts pleaded in the petition. W.P.($) No.493 of 2011 PETH'IONER Smt. Kanchan Ghai. Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh and athers. ..;_, (4) Learned counsel for the respondents submits that case of the petitioner would also be considered on the same lines. (5) In View of the statement made above, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increment as per circular dated 21/09/1974 issued by the State of Madhye Pradesh, after verihcation of the facts pleaded in the petition within a period of eight weeks from todeyi Sd/- Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge