'^z- ^ TL7 BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WMT PETITION (S) N0^1_ /2010 PETITIONER ircr^ ^^:^'^r' o ^^--^^\7a^" >.'x'i''":..>A'^)'i? \ *\.^^"" ^y- RESPONDENTS ^sSy-" Z''7-.- ..A.-" Bek, aged about 48 years, son of Shri Karolus Bek, working as - Asst. Teacher, Govemment Middle School - Bakaroma, Tah. Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) VERSUS 1.r State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ' The District Education Officer, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 3. The Block Education Officer, Education Block, - Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 QF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 633 of2010 PETmONER : Paulus Bek. VER8US RE8PONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WMT PET1TION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITLTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satash K. Asmhotri, J. Present: Shri A.N.Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G.A. fortiie State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 11th day of Februar),', 2010) With consent, leamed counsel for the parties were heard finally. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to fhe respondents to pay two advance increments fromthe date ofpassing ofD.Ed examination, on his own expenses, duringtheir service period. 2. Shri Bhakta, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in fhe present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by this Court in the mattei- of Yash-want Kzimar Bharadwaj v. MunicipaT Corporation, Dv.rg and another^ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh andcmother^. 3. Shri Bhakta farther submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be pennitted to make a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification ofthe fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired /. D.Ed certificate on his own expenses during the course ofhis serviee. ^m •fft^, ^ '^."^. '^sssss 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and inthe light ofthe decision ofthis Court in Yashwant Kwmar Bharadwaj and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. In view of foregoing, according to the leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners, nofhing sundves in this petition for adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge