g w g M A W ! P w w a v M i W u w a ) (\j § % % a § a l w £ $ w y § a m ~ $ $ m § m m w k ? E m : a d a m A E A w a g g u u m A m m w E g g w u g % . % . r & . g m . E A 3 2 $ « E m a . g A g : w g g x g § - a § § E @ . 4 . v a a j g g g w a g “ w ? E a a g a g i i & . F a ? “ “ N @ a w a n a l a m m a m l “ 3 i a a a a m . g a i d . 4 m mm g a n u a a w a gwg. a u u M - d 4 w & m . g E a . § £ § § o § § d d § § w !'*»<SII HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAIRH AT BILASPUR Petitioners Petitioner Respoudents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Ptetitioner Respondents Petitioaer Respondents Petitioner Respondents Pfetitioner Respondents W. P. (s) No. 2505 of2005 Chandresh Kuinar Baghel and ofhers Versus Respondents : State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chliatfegarh) & othcrs W. P. (s) No. 4232 of2005 Lakhan Lal Bhuwaiya Vcrsus State ot'Chhattisgarh & otbers W. P. (s) No. 4234 of 2005 Smt. N. Ram Versus State ofCtihattisgarh & ofhers W. P. (s) No. 4270 of2005 Champalal Dewangaa Vcrsus Stete of Chhattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 4271 of2005 Tareshwar Das Sahu Versus State ofChhattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 4272 of2005 Ku. Saroj Yadav Vcrsus State ofCfaliattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 4273 of 2005 Sudama Lal Sahu Versus State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers W. P. fs) No. 4274 of 2005 Lal Kumar Sahu Versus State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Pctitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respoadents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondeuts W. P. fsl No. 4275 of2005 Kaotiaiya Lal Saliu /ersus State ofCUhatdsgarh & ofhers W. P. (a) No. 4276 of2005 Saud Ahinad Asharfi /ersus State of Chhattisgarh & others W^Ris) NQ.4277 of 2005 Heinaat Kuinar Deshinukh fcrsus State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers W. P. (s) No. 4278 of2005 Narendra KuinarVenna Versus State of CUiattisgarh & others W,^islJlio,4279of2Q05 Girdhar Lal Sao Vcrsus State ofChhattisgarh & ofhers W. P. (sl No. 4439 of 2005 Indra Kumar Sahu Versus State ofChhattisgarh & others W. P, (s) No. 5152 of2005 Gyan Singh Kanwar Vcrsus State of Chhattisgarh & ofhers W. P. (s1 No. 5153 of2005 Ramesh Kuiriar Siaha Versus State of Chhattisgarh & otiiers W.P. (s) No. 5154 of2005 Vcrsus Dayalu Ram Choudhary i State of Chhattisgarh & olfaers 1'l'l tS.'sfl Sa^'iB.TMPT:"'' Petitioner Respoadents Petitioner Respoadents W. P. (s) No. 5155 of%)05 Gajendra Das Vaishnav feraiis State of Chhattisgarh 8s others And W. P. (s) No. 5156 of2005 Bhan Smgh Thakur Vcrsus State ofChhatfegarb. & others SIa^e Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnlhotri. Shri Rakesh Anfhony, Advocate for fhe Petitioners. Shri V.V.S. Moorthy, Deputy Advocate Qeneralwifh Sint. Anju Ahuja, Deputy Govt. Advocate for fhe State/respondents. ORDER (3lrt October, 2006) The petitioners aie working as Upper Division Teacheis/Assistaat Teachers in the goveminent schools. In the coursc oftheir services as Upper Division Teachers/Assistant Teachers, the petitioners have obtaiaed B.Ed./B.T.I. examination certificates on tfaeu- own cxpenses before 1.3.1999. Writ Petitmu (s) No.s 2505/2005, 4232/2005, 4234/2005, 4270/2005, 4271/2005, 4272/2005, 4273/2005, 4274/2005, 4275/2005, 4276/2005, 4277/2005, 4278/2005, 4279/2005, 4439/2005, 5152/2005,5153/2005,5154/2005,5155/^)05 and 5156/2005 are being disposed of by this couunon order as the facts aiid question oflaw involved in these petitions are cominon. According to leamed couusel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advaace iacreinents in view of the decision of this Coiirt ia the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwai Vs. Municipal Corporation, Dura and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwaat Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Diug and aaothcr (Supra), came to fhe conclusion that the teachers, who had obtamed B. Ed. /B.T.I. 's^ ai^^isi ~^9 4 Examination Certificate on their own cxpenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by fhe State Goveminent of Madhya Pradesh. Further in fhe matter of Smt. Msdiorama. Shrivastaya Vs, State pf M.P. and others { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench, while considering the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherem., it is provided fhat the Assistant Teachers, who have acquired B.Ed. degree at their own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shaU be entitled to two advance increments, relied on decision iu the case of Rakesh Kuinar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. & others passed in O.A.NO. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999 wherein it is observed that fhe circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retTospectively. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistaat Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entifled to two advaace uicreiaents. It is pouited out by leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners that the fhen State of Madhya Pradesh had ffled a Special Leave Petition against fhe orders passed by the Tribunal and the HonTile Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 ffled against fhe order ofthe Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the efifect that the circular dated 1.3.1999 caanot be made appUcable retrospectivety, passed by the Tribunal, becoines final and fhe same shall be applicable to all the Assistant Teachera who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. exammation certificate before 1.3.1999. It is fiirther substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by fhe present State of Madhya Pradcsh wherein the circular clearly states about ftie decision of the Supremc Court. Leamed counsel for the petitionere fiirther submits that the facts aud question of law involved in fhe present case are squarety covered by decision ofttus Cotut ia the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corpoiation, Diu-g and auother (Supra), to which leamed counsel appearing for fhe respondents fairty MK\^ ^.^:^-^l^:^^.^.-^;€siiF^^ ^^^®^^^^^^^^^^^^¥s'^Ss^^3:f2B3SSS concedes and agrees with fhe avennent m.ade by leamed couusel appearing for the petitioners. 7. Accoidingly, fhe writ petitions are aUowed ui terms of fhe order passed in the case of Yashwaat Kuaiar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and anofher (Supra), subject to verification of fhe fact as to whefher the petitioaera have acquired B.Ed./B.T.I. Exanunation Certificate on fheir own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 aad farfher whether they have been paid two advaacc increiDfints or not. No order as to costs. 8. A copy offhis order be placed on record ofconnected matters. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge ^^;