CL^^ BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) N0. /2010 ^i PETITIONER Baliram Bhagat (D.Ed.), aged about 47 years, son of Shri Ramjiram Bhagat, working as —Asst. Teacher, Govt Middle School - Mirigurha, Tah. Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENTS . ^••'y^" \^:\^y ^:..^ '••:'\y\T \-;' .'.^ .^',^''ry f\'l< ."' vS>' ^ .•' •yv" ,^-' 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ' The District Education Officer, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 3. -^The Block Education Officer, Education Block, - Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, ^ rj'^o^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 637 of2010 PETITIONER : BaliramBhaaat. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : StateofChliattisgarh&Others. WMT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF LNDIA SB: Hon' Me Shri Satish K. Asnihotri. .L Present: Sfari A.N.Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G.A. forthe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 11th day of February, 2010) Wifh consent, leaiTied counsel fbrthe parties were heard tinally 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments fromthe date ofpassing ofD.Ed examination, on his own expenses, during his service period. 2. Shri Bhakta, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved m the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided bv this Court in fhe matter of Yashwant Kumar Bharad-wqf v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another^ and Gopesk Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofChkattisgarh and anothef^ . 3. Shri Bhakta lurther submits fhat the instant petition is squarely covered by -the decision as afbrestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification ofthe fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed certiticate 6n his own expenses duringthe eourse ofhis serviee. ^^) i^r3 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordanee with law and in the light oftlie decision ofthis Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharad-waj and Gopesh Kwnar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks Irom Ihe date of receipt of the representation. 5. In view of foregoing, according to the leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners, nothing siirvives in tius petition fbr adjudication. ~ 6. Accordmgly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge