Applicant : Manoj kumar Nishad , Aged 27Year S/O Late Shri Manbodhi Ram Nishad , Asst.teacher Govt Middle School , Mokhala ‘ Tas. , Disttl Rajnandgaon (C.G.) V61‘S6S . Non-applicant l. The State Govt. Of Chhattisgarh Through the secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya Dau Kalyansingh Bhawan, ( Old D.K. Bhawan) Raipur ( C. G.) 2. The District Education Odicer, Rajnandgaon Cl G.). APPLICATION U/S 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ACT 1985 HIGH COURT OF CHHA’I'I‘ISGARH AT BILASPUR w. P. (s) No. 4458 of 2005 Petitioner : Hatnamyan Singh Rajput Versus Respondents : The State Govt of Chhatiisgarh 8n another w. P. (s) No. 4336 of 2005 Petitioner z Mohd. Samad Versus The State Govt. of Chhah‘isgarh &. another Respondents W. P. (s) No. 4305 of 2005 Kalyan Singh Sahu Versus Petitioner Respondents : The State Govt. of Chham‘sgarh as another w. P. (s) No. 4759 of 2005 Petitioner : Umend Singh Mandavi Vcxsus Respondents : The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh 85 another w. P. (s) No. 4304 of 2005 Petitioner : Smt. Sushma Pandey Versus Respondents : The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh 8r. another W. P. (s) No. 4387 of 2005 Petitioner : ' Manoj Knmar Nishad Versus ‘ The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh 5s another / s Stage Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Satlsh K. Apihoh’i.‘ Respondents Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for the Petitioners. ' Shri Utkaish Verma, Govt Advocate for the State] respondents. O R D ER (27th October, 2006) 1. The petitioners are working as Assistant Teachers in the government schools. In the course of their services as Assistant Teachers, the petitioners have obtained D.Ed. certihcates on their own expenses before 1.3. 1999. W 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the ‘Basic Training Institute’ (B.T.L) certiiicate has been renamed by the Older of the State Government as ‘Diploma in Education’ (D.Ed.} certiiicate. The petitioners, who have obtained D.Ed. certificate prior to 1.3.1999 are entitled to the same reliefas is granted to the candidates who had obtained B.T.I./B.Ed. certincates on their own expenses as per the cimulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999. 3. Writ petition (s) No.s 4458/2005, 4336/2005, 4305/2005, 4759/ 2005, 4304/2005 and 4387/2005 are being disposed of by this common order as the facts and question of iaw involved in these petitions am common. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advance increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kurnar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed. /B.T.L Certidcate on their own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24. 12.98 (Annexure P/7) issued by the State Government of Madhya Pradesh. Further in the matter of Smt. Manorama Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and others { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } the Madhya Pradesh State Administrau've Tribunal, Gwalior Bench, while considering the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherein, it is provided that the Kssistant Teachers, who have acquired B.Ed. degree at their own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shall be entitled to two advance increments, relied on decision in the case of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. &. others passed in O.A.No. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999’Wherein it is observed that the circular dated 1.3. 1999 cannot be made applicable retmspectively. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is‘ entitled to two advance increments. 6. It is pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the then State of Madhya Pradesh had med a Special Leave Petition against the orders passed by the Tribunal and the Hon’ble 2/3'5 appearing for the peu'h'oners. Sd/— Thakur Saush K. Agnihotri Judge <1 m 1 Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 iiled against the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the diiection to the effect that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retrospech'vely, passed by the Tribunal, becomes final and the same shall be applicable to all the Assistant Teachers who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.L cettihcate before 1.3. 1999. It is further substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State of Madhya Ptadesh wherein the circular clearly states about the decision of the Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law involved in the present case are squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bhamdwaj Vs. Municipal Corporah'on, Durg and another (Supra), to which learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counsel Accoxdingly, in the event, D.Ed. cerh'iicate holdem am equal to B.T.I. /B.Ed. cex lilicate holders; they are entitled to the same relief in terms of the orders passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporah'on, Durg and another (Supm), subject to verihcation of the fact as to Whether the petin‘oners have acquired D.Ed. Certidcate on their own expenses as per the circulam dated 24.12.1998 &. 1.3.1999 and further Whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to A copy of this order be placed on record in connected matters.