\ y~6^— SlHGLi IN THE HIGH GOURr OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fSl N0. ?>^5^ /2010 WRITPETITION UNDER ARTICLE2260FTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PETITIONER \/o/-r'f? 1° '.••" \^ .' ^^ 'y^ ^' >... "^" o- RESPONDENTS Shuk Kumar Meshram, aged about 47 years, son of Shri Ratan Singh Meshram, occupation - Asst. a\ -^ Teacher, Presently working as Upper Divjsion Teacher, posted at Post Matnc Tribal Boys Hostel (Office of Block Educafion Officer - Mohala) Vikas Khand Mohala Distt. Rajnanygaon <CG) VERSUS l^ State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Tribal, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur ^(C.G.) 2.' Asst. Commissioner, Deptt of Triba!, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) 3, Joint Djrector (Treasury, A/c & , Pension), Raipur (CG) 4. Block Education Gfficer, Block Mohala,Distt, Rajnandgaon (CG). ^. Sf^V W f<-) 'tWT 3H^T st)*li<t) ^rra^r^t^. ^ss ^iWM^, 8>fll-H<i'c, 'r°i<niyy,< . ^,-?.^^.(i^/io sn^T'q^? ('^3^*1) TOIIW^lfet 311^1 ^'Pr(t<ilT4t'^ 'HR^Tf "^ fs^ <^^l< ^73(fiiH3n^I SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohait Shrivastava. J. 23-07^010 Shri A. N, Bhakta, counsel for| Ms. Sangeeta Mishra, Panel| advance copy. Heard. Learned counsel appearing he having passed B.T. I. examinatk) the petitkiner, Lawyer fbr the State/respondents on for the petitioner submits that the petitbner is entitled to benefit of tw[3 advance increments on account of n before his appointment at his own cost. It is submitted that the issue |nvolved in the present petition is no longer res integra and the same ha; another Writ Appeal No.87/2009, consideration of the case for grant| oircular dated 21-09-1974 issued by] been finally deoided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case oi Astiif Saxena vs. State ofM-P, & Ors., 2009 fflQMPJR (SC) 5ft It is (urth^r submitted that this Court has also taken a similar view in his orper dated 06-02-2009 passed in W.P,(S)No.6257 of 2008. Learned c|3unsel ft?r the petitioner further draws attention ofthis Court to order datep 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeal No.124 of 2009, wherein relying upoji the judgment ofthe Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena (supra) |nd the order passed by this Court in directions have been issued for of tvro advance increments as per the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verifioation ofthe facts pteaded in th^ petition. Learned oounsel for the reslpondents submits that case of the petitioner would also be considered ()n the same lines. .W, .^iaTiFIPT —FS/147—2/2B10 —1,00,000. <BI^CW ft-fi'fi wn sn^v »i Tumane WWIT <S*T)<!(» 3^1 "qiqidir, (?'rfT'MTre, i^c'miy —^1.!^}^:S^^... an^i '^f^v (yitsi^) In view of the statement rrjade above, this petition is finally disposed of with a dirastion to the re^pondent authorities to consider and decjde the claim ofthe petitioner for per ciroular dated 21-09-1974 jssueifl by theState of Madhya R-adesh, after verification ofthe facts pleaded |i the petition within a period of eiglit -weeks from today. 4>l^id^'1 +iN<^i ^f Is^ <^)*$K ^TaffilHSII^t grant of two advance inorements as Sd-/ Manindra Mohan Shrivastava '- ^ Judge