^-^•^^- mTIIEJION'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. IV& ^72010 PETITIONER \^ h i^^. '<?^?-'"' ^):'" ^y^^ ^^ RESPONDENTS /;' Ram Prakash Soni, son of Shri Kapil Nath Soni, aged about 45 years, Lecturer, Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Balouda, Block Balouda District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 The Principal Govt. Boys Higher Secondary School, Balouda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF GHHATnSGARH AT BltASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1 186 of 2010 PETmpNER : Ram Piakash Soni. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State of Chhattisgarh & Ottiere. Writ Petition Under Articte 226 Of The ConstituUon Of Indla SB: Hon'bte Shri SaBsh K. Aanihobi. J. Present Shrt ^tehwanl Shukla, Advocate for the peUUoner. Shri P.KBhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State/ieqxmdents. Amit ORALORDER (Passed on 22ri day af Mareh, 2010) With the consent of leamed counsel for the parties, the matter is hearet flnally. 1. By this petltlon, the petittonerseeks a directton to the responctoits to pay two advance inctemerrts on passing of B.Ed. examinatfon, on his own expenses, before entering into servlce. 2. Leamed counsel anaearing for the pdiUoner submlts that the Issue involved In the present case is no longer res integia as the same has been conddered arat decided by Uie Supreme Court in -4sAa SaxaiKi v. Stals ofM.P. & Ois. as weit as by this Court in the mattBr of Yashwmit Kumar Bhaiadwa/ v. Munic^al Corpoialjon, Duig & anattwf and Gcyesh KumarVemia v. Tha State Govt af CMsSBsgaih andanoSie^. 3. Shri Shukla further submlts that the inslant petitton Is scpiarely covered by the deciskm as aforestated. Thus, the peBtkmer may be permitted to make a representation to the respondent authorib'es to decide his cases for grant of two increments In the llght crf aforestated dedsion, sut^ect to verlfieaflai of the fact asto whether the petilloner has acquired B.Ed. certiffcate on his own expenses before entering into service. 4. Leamed counsel app^ring for the State/iespondents submits that in the event, the pefitioner makes a represaitatfon, the same will be corsidered and declded, in accoretance witti taw and In the l^ht of the decistons at the Sufweme Court in Asha Saxena (supia) as well as this Court in Yaslmwtt Kunwr Bhasadwal w\d Gopesh Kumar Vwire (supta), wlthin a period of four weeks from the date of teceipt of the representatton. 5. In view of foregoing, accoiding to the tearned counsel appearing for the petifioner, nothing survlves in this petitfon tor acfludication. 6. Accordingly, the writ p^itton is di^aosed tit. i sw- ; 1 SatishK.Agnihotri Judge '2009(HI)MPJR(SC)59 22006(U)MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005