r»i?T Ghansfayam Kumar Soni S/o Shri PurusotSam lal Soni aged about 49 years, Assistant Teacher, Presently posted at Primary Scliool Baihar Block - Arang Dist - Raipur (C.G.) : l.State of Chhattisgarh Througfa the Secretary, Denartment of School Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, )ist-Raipur(C.G.) Officer Raipur, District - ;.G.) 3. The Block Education OfBcer Arang, District - Raipur ; fC.G.) Present: Shri C.R.Sahu. Advocats for the petitioner. Shri Vinay Pacdey, Panel La'wyer for tfae State / respondeats .1 to3. nd (Passed on 2UU ofApril1, 3007) that the fact 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petil the State/respondents jointly su questios oflaw involved in the present writ petition are the same to that of in Yasl r •CG 96?, which ia.s been disposed of vide ordsr lated 03.04.2006. Leamed counsel appearing for the respondents does not controvert the said submission. tn subsequent cases, i.e., Writ Petition (S.) No.4130 of )5 (Gopesh Kwn.ar Verma vs. The State Govt. of Chha.ttisgarh tiiiother) and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-12-2006, pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995, issued by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and fhe prospectus of Diploma in Educatios Examination, it was clarified that the nomenclature ofthe Basic Training Institirte, i.e., B.T.I. has been changed and renamed as Diploma ia Education, i,e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Certificate holders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (S.) No.4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma vs. Tbe State Govt. of C^hhattisgarh mwanother) (Supra). Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed m the case of Yashwant Kmnar Bharadws Vs. Mumcipal Corporation, Durg another (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed, Examination Certificate on his own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999 and further whether he has been paid two advance iacrements or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge Anut