h ^) :*ir IN THE HON'BLE HI6H COURT OF CHHATTCSGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.('S)NO. "^-^6 /2011 PETITCONER Lal Bihari Sonwani, aged about 43 years, S/o Shri Kartik Ram Sonwani, Posted as Upper Division Teacher, .Govt. Middle School Khodn' (Pasan), Block Podi- Uproda, Distt. Korba (C.6.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS 1. ^ ^&\y" .r'»<s^v..*••"' .0 \--rf.--;\\.- ^.^y 2. A-' State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawdn, Raipur (C.G.) Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.6.) "K!l'^^^2^~^/ -..,''4/$ Tfc"iy 3. ^ Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Korba, Distt.Korba(C.(5.) 4. Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Korba, bistt. Korba (CG.) WRITPETCTION UN&ER ARTICLE_226 OF THE CONSTCTUTCON OF INDIA The petitioner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under:- 1. -PARTICULARS OF THE PETCTCONER '^t. As mentioned in the Cause title. HiGHGOURTOFCHHATnSGARH:BIL^SPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 776 OF 2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Lat Bihari Sonwani Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition underArticle 226 ofthe Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.V.Shridhar, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents. ORDER fORAD (Passed on this 9th day of February, 2011) 1. Heard ieamed counsel for the parties. 2. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the >ner is entitled to benefit of two advance increments on 3. account of the fact that the petitioner has passed B.Ed. examination in the year 1993 before entering into the service i.e. on 08.04.1994, at his own cost. Learned cQunsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no ionger res integra, as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Ssxena v. State of M.P. & Ors.1 as weil as by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporaffon, Durg and snoths^ snd Gopssh Kumsr Vsrma v. Ths State Govt. of Chhattisgarh andanother^. Learned counsei further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the 12009(lil)MPJR(SC)59 22006(!!) MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005 yfS'^'9^' ffi^w 7. 2 ••:..•:- :' . / • ; ^ ;1 :1 • light of aforestated decisions, sybject to veriTication of the facts asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.Ed. certificate on his own expenses before entering into service. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, 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 four weeks from the date of receipt ofthe representation. In viev/ of foregoing, according to the leamed counsel appearlng Tor the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. /'- ashok SatfehK.Aga ot" Judge