-1- ^ ^|,|^IE |it:l\ISH PETITIONERS ^s 4>'^.VV % 1. ^- IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (C.G.l W.P.(S)NO. ^(^0 2010 Smt. Anibha Agrawal, W/o Vijay Kumar Agrawal, aged about 40 years, Lecturer Govt. .S.R . Hr. Sec. School Nagri (Dhamtari) District - Dhamtari (C.G.) 2. ^ Smt. Minakshi Ramteke, (Before marriage Minakshi Chouhan) W/o Shri Raj Kumar Ramteke, aged about 41 years, Lecturer Govt. Shringi Rishi. Hr. Sec. School Nagri (Dhamtari) District - Dhamtari (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS /J^ ^' g €>j §»Rc j @ I1 l^\ u-^/ 'V^x^ ^^/ '""^ir^.y ^^^. ^ ^.^/^ € 2. 3. ^ 4 State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Secretary Tribal Welfare Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner Tribal Arfd Welfare Department Distt. Dhamtari C.G. DIstric Education Officer Distt. Dhamtari (C.G) -2- WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA :- THE T- -; XI-HC-22 ^TT^T^T f<Tii<=b sni^r ?t)^i<=^ <Hfia '^sr ^li<4ld<LI, ^Ti1^^<5, [cKrii^y 'SIT^T "cra^? ^ry HW^{\ 5b^l<=h 'SIT^T ^S^K _......u.t..&.^.i..^il^/G? 7^""'"""""""""""""""'"^ 2(] fci^dsr* 3^T'^<TT^R ^rftcT SB.:_H<lN^BLBJtfR.JUSHCE_PR!TI]Pj 07.12.2010 Shri Somkant Verma, counsel Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L. for the Counsel for the petitioners entitled to benefit of two advance hawng passed B.Ed. examination own cost. It is submitted that thd petition is no longer res integra and by the HonlDle Supreme Court in th( ofM.P. & Ors. 2009 (III)MPJR (SC} |59. for the petitioners. gtate. sbbmits that the petitioners are increments on account of they their appointment at their issue involved in the present same ha8 been finally decided case of Asha Saxeaa Vs. State b^fore tbe It is further submitted that thl view in its order dated 6.2.2009 Counsel for the petitioners furthei| 29.4.2010 passed in Writ Appeal upon thejudgment of the Supreme 4 (supra) and the order passed by this 87/2009, directions have been issue<|: grant of two advance increments 4 issued by the State of Madhya Prad^ pleaded in the petition. Counsel for the State subnjits would also be considered on the samle In view of above, the petition the respondent authorities to decid grant of two advance increments ctii^(<n4rt HW^\\ ^ Fs^t <F3i^i< ^ 3Tp<FT 3TT^T KBR DIWAKER ls Court has also taken a siniiiar pa|ssed in W.P.(S) No. 6257/2008. submits that the order dated ^O. 124/2009, wherein relying pourt ln the case of Asha Saxena pourt in another WritAppeal No, for consideration of the case for |is per circular dated 21.9.1974 ish^ after verification of the facts that case of the petitioners b Unes. t- is disposed of with a direction to the claim of the petitioners for is per circular dated 21.9.1974 [Tfr^^fe^ XI-HC-22 '^;;. "5^ -4i<4H<LI. ^Tfly4^, f^<ni^ll< 3T[t?T 'q^? +<l*<dl $b+<i<=h '* *^T^ 200 '^T^T' 'STT^T'^T fq^ich sni^r 5^^ich ^if^a ^T^I ^cTT^R ^rftn issued by the State of Madhya Pradej pleaded in the petition within a period| It is made clear that this Courtt on merits of the case and the authorit|y to decide the same strictly in accordar| CM^t<n<fl"t TITCT^Tf ^ Fs^ iF^^K ^ 3Tf^R ^3?^^T ^h after verification of the facts |of eight weeks from today. has not expressed any opinion concerned would be at Uberty |ce with law. „—_ Sd/- pritinker Diwaker Judge [Tft^ s.fo^