^N^I^ISS®^^^^^^^ G^<( INTHE HON'BLE HI6H COURT CIR £MHAT-C1S^^KMM- BILASPUR (C.&.) " W.P. (S) N0. Go^ /2010 PETCTEONER \'~r' s' >,.••'' ./. ^o.%<'^° s.-' ,^^^^ ^.^./-:^..'-' ^ ^cy' y"'.^- Surendra Kumar bubey S/o Shri Tribhuwan Prasad Dubey, Aged about 42 years, Upper Division Teacher, Presently posted at Government Middle School Boys, Saida, Takhatpur, Distt. Bialspur (C.6.) RESPONDENTS : ^ VERSUS ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^2. The Director of Public Instruction, Pension Bada, Raipur (C.6.) ^3. Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) ^4. District Education Officer Composite Building Bilaspur Bilaspur (C.6.) 5. Block Education Officer, Takhatpur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.6.) ^ :N©isi.i.ia®tsi<miaB.Biia®iiggiiSlMgiNiiWlB^ XI-HG—7S :S? ^ll<<l<fl<4, ©tll'H'IS,fs|C11'Mlj,< ..lfc(:.e.:..C.a?..^:..g.9j.aLLCO Sf^V 'q'W (*icl{j51<ti) 3TI^I W R;'1 '(Tsff 3^] ^tfl^) ^iiwnfta 3ii^i ^Nf<n<fh TFTO^tlT ^ f^^ ^-^i< ^aiRpTsn^si • tS^\Tlff^' 2 83.10.2010 Shri K.S.Pawar, couasel for Shri Vivek Shanna, P.L. for| fhe petitioner. the State. Counsel for fhe petitioner entitted to benefit of two advauci hav-uig passed B.T.I. examuiatioD| own cost. It is subinitted that fh< petition is no longer res integra decided bv the Honlale Supremt |subinits tiiat the petitioner is increiuents on account of he before his appointment at his issue iavolved 'm the present ^nd the sam.e has been fmatly Court in the case of It is further submitted tha siinilar view in its order dated Q 6257/2008. C^iuusel for fhe petii order dated 29.4.2010 passed i] wherein relyuig upon the judgine] case ofAsha Sassena (supra) and iu aaother Writ Appeal No. 8'/] issued for consideration of the uicrements as per circul.ar dated] of Madhya Pradesh. after verifical petition. peniione Itl It this Court has also taken a .2.2009 passed ia W.P.(S) No. lioner fiirtlier subDlits tts.at the Writ Appeal N0. 124/2009, (lt oftbe Supreiue Coiirt in tbe |the order passed by this Court 72009. directions have been t;ase for grant of hvo advance 121.9.1974 issued bv the State fcion of fhe facts pleaded ia thc Counsel for fhe State would also be considered on the t subi41ts that case of fhe petitioners saine lines. , -'' XI-HC—78 3^t '^iiid'M, ^til'y'iic, fsi<vii'My,< ^-^........U.-.(?.,.Cs>3.....tfe:..6.^xl(p. s^v •q^r (^cii^sr^sT) an^r a^ [<;•<!•* ^H 3TT^?T'3WT3? TWIW ^fer ?n^T peqtion aufhorities Stiate In view of above. the direction to fhe respondent petitioner for grant of two advaac^ dated 21.9.1974 issued bv the verification of the facts pleaded in eight weeks fi'om todav. It is mdde clear (hat fhis <] opinion on uierits of fhe case ai( would be at Hberty to decide fhe| with law. yourt has not expressed aiiy td the authority concemed saiae strictlv ia accord.ance <M<ila4)Ti '^ra^if ^' 'f^^ ^pii^K ^sffiprsiii^ is disposed of wifh a to decide the claicu of the tucreinents as per circular of Madhya Pradesb after |he petition withia a period of Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge 0