r" r^^y^^ ^i: QZKVT' c^ t<5-^7 IN THE HON»BLEHIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P.(SINO. \^{-\t^ /2010 PETITIONER \y^0../;^^ ^ ^'^.'••••y^ < ^""'^^ ^^'\2 ^\'^ ^' Smt. Clementina Tigga W/o Late Juliyush Tigga, aged about 49 years, working as Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School Kinkel, Block Jashpur, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^:1, i^. ^ss v State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) District Educaiton Officer, Jashpur, Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Block - Jashpur Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) Treasury Officer, Treasury Account & Pension Jashpur, Distt.-Jashpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ ^) HIGH COURT^)ECHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR PETITIONER RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION (S) N0.1843 OF 2010 Smt. Clementina Tigga Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others (Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P.K. Bhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 22nd day ofApril, 2010) 1) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of B.Ed. examination, on her own expenses, before entering in service. 2) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involyed in the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State of M.P. & Ors.1 as well as by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and anothe/2 and Gopesh KumarVerma v. The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh and anothe^. 3) Learned counsel further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decisions (supra). Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide her case in the light of aforestated decisions, subject to verification of the facts. 1 2009 (III) MPJR (SC) 59 2 2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005 4) 5) J 6) Arun Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event, the petitioner makes representations, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj (supra) and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihom Judge