^^/^2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ petition (S) No / C5~D 3 /2007 Petitioner Devendra Kumar Sahu S/o Bakhat Ram Sahu, .***?'.-t^''*' V.-!"("5W" ...-••''' Aeed about 50 years .••'''.^\n]•• R/'o Assistant Teacher P.S. ..•••".^?<^-"'' .'> "\ ^* r.-y- ^•->^ VERSUS Mainpuri Block Kawardha, Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.) Respondents : 1. State of Chhattisgarh ,^ Through : Secretaiy School Education Department .^y^ -^'^^ Mantralaya D.K.S. Bhawan, ^? ^C'^Z) / A.'<& Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2. District Education OfGcer, Kawardha, , Distt- Kabirdham (C.G.j \VRIT PETITION UNDER SECTION 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISe^RH AT KU-ASPUR W. P. (5) No. 1003 of 2007 Petitioner Devendra Kumou" 5ahu Versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh & others Singte Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri Deepak Jain, Counsel for •the Petitioner. Ms. Sunita Jain, Panel lawyer for the State/respondents. ORDER 0>assed on 21st day of February, 2007) 1. The petitioner is working as Assistwi-t Teacher in the govemment school. In the course of his servicss as Assistant Teacher, the petitioner has obtained D.Ed. Examination Cert-ificates in the year 1995, his own expenses. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner ajbmits that the question involved, herein asto whether tiie teachers, who obtained D.Ed. Examination Certificates on their- own expenses, is entitled to iwo advance increments. 3. According to teamed counse! for the petitioner, the petitioner is entitted to two advance increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaij Vs. Municipal Corporation. Dwg and another {2006 (11) MPJR-C6 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, burg and anotiier (Supro), came to the conclusion that the taachers, who had obtained B. Ed. /B.TJ. -'—^\ Examination Certificate on their own expenses, are cavered by the circutardated 24.12.98 issued by 1+ie State Sovernment of Madhya Pradesh. 4. In subsequent cxises, 'I.K., Writ Petition (S.) No.4130 of 2005 (jSapesh KIMOT Vwwa vs. The State Sewt. of Chhatiisgaph amS mothei) ond other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-12-2006, pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995, issued by the Secretary, Boou'd of Secondary Education, Bhopat and Ihe prospectus of biploma in Education Examination, it wos clarjfied that the nomenclature of the Basic Training Institute, i.e., B.T.I. has been chonged and renamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the O.Ed. Certificate holders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (5.) No.4130 of 2005 (6opesh Kww Verma vs. The State 6twt. of Chherttisgarh and aiwtfief) (Supra). 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the facts ond question of law involved in the present case is squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kimnar Bhcradwcy Vs. Municipal Cwporation, Durg and another (Supra), to which leamed counsel appearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by leamed counsel appearing for the petitionerd. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of yashwant 16muar Bharodwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, f>wg and another (Supra), subject to ^^SSS^t verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner hds acquir'ed &. Ed. Examination Certificates on tiieir own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 & 1.3.1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge Yogesh ^.