({Ma W udam 4e bwnygyg‘a l_n the Honble Hiqh Court 9f Chhattishgarh §_t_ Bilaspur (C.G.) d @ WP. (S) No. @W / 2996/07 Petitioner ................ fT’Sita Ramffurkiya Aged 48 years 3am *Kwki ya , Govt. Primary School,Motlpur Tahsil Patan, District, Durg (C..) G VERSUS 1.The State Government of Chhattshgarh, / Through the Secretary, Education & Tribal Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) “536$ 2/.,The District Education Officer, Durg (C.G) Respondent Writ petition under articles 22/6/ 9_f the Constitution of India for issuance of writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, CertiorarjJ Prohibition and other suitable WRIT gr writs, Order or orders, Direction or’directions. i HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIsGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI‘ Q. WRIT PETITIoN (s,) No. 69o OF 2007 Pe‘l'i't'ioner' Sampa‘r Lal Saiume versus The S‘ra're Governmern‘ of Chha‘f‘fisgarh and anofher Responden‘rs WRIT PETITION (5,) No. 691 OF 2007 PeTi‘rioner : Sim Ram Turkiya Ver‘SUS Respondem's : The Sm‘re Government of Chhaf‘risgarh and ano‘l'her- WRIT PETrrION (5.) No. e92 OF 2007 Ksir-mo Dhurwe Pe'rifioner Ve r‘SLIS Respondenfs : The 51'a1'e Government of Chha‘r'tisgar'h and anofher And wan PETITION cs.) No. 693 OF 2007 PeTiTioner' : SaTya Numyan Sahu Versus The STnfe Governmen‘r of Chha‘r‘risgarh and ano‘rher' Responderrrs ?resen1‘ : Mr. Ajay $hrivas‘mvai counsel for The peTiTioner(s). Ms. Suni‘ra Jain, Panel lawyer for The responden‘rs/Sm're. ORDER (Passed on This 7*“ Day of February, 2007) Learned counsel appearing for The peTi‘rioners as we“ as for The Sfa‘re/responden‘rs join‘rly submiT Thaf The facTs and quesTTon of law invoTved in The presenT baTch of wriT peTiTions are squareiy covered by fVW the decision of this Courf in fhe case of Yashwanf Kumar Bharadwqj vs. Mwiciaa! Camora?ian, Duzy and anefhei . 2. In subsequen‘l’ cases, i.e., Wr-if Pefi‘rion (5.) No.4i30 of 2005 (éapesh Kumar Vanna vs. Tim Sfafe 60W. of Chhaffisgarh and anofher) and ofher- connec‘l'ed mai‘l’ers, decided by 1*his Cour‘r on 15-12— 2006, pursuanf To The memo daied 28-1-1995, issued by The Sacra-fury, .Boar'd of Secondary Educa‘i‘ion, Bhopal and The prospectus of Diploma in Educa‘rion Examina'i‘ion, i'r was clarified Tha‘r The nomenciature of fhe Basic Training Insfifufe, iie., B.Tl. has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Educafion, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Cer'rifica‘l'e holders are also covered by The decision in Wrif Peti'rion (5.) No.4130 of 2005 (6opesh @mar Verma vs. 771a 5mm $0”. of Chhafh‘syarh and anafherMSupra). 3. For ‘ihe aforemem'ioned reasons, fhe wri‘l' peiifions are disposed of in 'terms of ‘i'he decision of This Cour-1’ in 1'he maifer of Yashwanf Kumar Bharaa’waj (5upra), subjecf To verificaTion of The facT as To wheTher The pe‘l’i‘l‘ioners have acquired B.T.I./D.Ed. CerTificaTes aT Their own expenses as per The circulars daTed 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 and furTher wheTher They have been paid Two advance incremenTs or noT. No order as To cosTs. «4. A copy of This order be placed on The record of The connecTed wriT peTiTions. l l Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri ,I Judge L zoos (I1) mums 96 Subhash