^ff l2rzr>~- Q> IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBILASPUR W.P.tSjNO. ^<^G /2010 PETITIONER \ns^"iy .^w^ ...s^^^ ^ef^ ^^^< RESPONDENTS «i S-ff <?^«hij, j •:. S Smt. Usha Martin (before marriage Silas) W/o Shri Sunil Martin, aged about 51 years, Head Mistress, Block -Simga, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS ^ : 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^. District Education officer, Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Simga, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 4. Treasury Officer, Treasury, Accounts and Pension, Raipur/Distt. Raipur (C.G.) WMT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF INDIA. ^' ^r^r ^r'f^ff^' WT 3T?^l Sfi^i^ ^v^ 's^ ^ww^, fSi-^ww, |c«ni<H^< ^...ML^.y^..^^±l]^ ^pr^TW?w"""v'<"v<?'>""'r"w""'""""""""^ 200f ^T^?F Tra^R> ('^i^^T) ¥¥l!TW^ft^W^l SB : Hon'bie Shri ^anindra rvloh. h Shrivastava, J. 26-07-2010 Shri Sornkant Verma, couns^l Shri Ajit Singh, Panei Lawy< copy. Heard. Le-amed counsei appearing is entitied to benefit of two advan< passed B.Ed. exarnination before subrnitted that the issue invoived integra and the same has been finapiy in the case of Asha Ssixena vs. St 59. it Is further submitled that thisl order dated 06-02-2009 passed counsei for the petitioner further 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeai judgment of the Supreme Court In order passed by this Court in an^ have been issued for consideraticln increments as per circuiar dated 2| Pradesh, after verification oftiie factt: ^i for the petitioner. ^r for the State/respondents on acivance Learned counsei for the petitioner wouid aiso be considere^ --^: ^Hfd^l'l ^I^ff ^'^^f'^^$R ^ 3T^TH 3?!^T t>r the petitioner submits that the petltioner (;e increments on account of she having |her appointment at her own cost. It is |in the present petition is no ionger res decided bythe Hon'bie Supreme Court ^ate ofM.P. & Grs. 2QG9 (M) MPJR (SC) ICourt has aiso taken a similar view in his |in W.P.(S)No.S257 of 2008. Learned attention of this Court to order dated ^o.124 of 2009, wherein reiylng upon the the case of Asha Saxena (supra) and the ^ther Writ Appeai No.87/2009, directions of the case for grant of frwo advance i-09-1874 issued by the State of rvladhya |:s pieaded in the petition. ddaws respondents submits that case of the on the same iines. ./2010—1,00,000. ^^-f^^, ^^•f\^ i '•^.'r>, ? i r^ i \^^^" ^^^- ^m^ii^sw^ "T^r -^rraToT^, '^ft^FT^, [®i<ni<ri^< rf^....!^.f.©.^o.:..3.%.^(?./..^ -^200 ^T^T ^W ( ^is^^) W^i^T'f^N? WT 3?T^T ^^ f N I^W^ft^^??^ ^- in view of the statement madl with a direction to the respondent ai| of the petitioner for grant of tvvo a| 21-03-1974 issued by the State of| facts pieaded in the petition within a ct)S^Ic?l<fll 'RP^f ^ f^St ^N^R ^3flm^T^T ^ above, tt-iis petition is finaiiy disposed of ithorities to consider and decide the ciairn tvance increments as per circuiaj dated ^ladhya Pradesh, after verification of the period of eight weeks from today. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge ^T^^T^N^^IT^^, IR^^Th^—FS,147—2/2010—1,00,000.