In the HonbleHigh Gpurt ofChhattishgarh at Bilaspur (C.G.) W.P. No. 2 02-^ 2006 ..'•: ^/^ ^M^ ^•^^p^ s€^.. €^--"" ^ ^- v^ Petitioner ............ Pyariram yadav aged 40 years son of ^ Shri Baluram Yadav, Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Village pidingpar, Block Mohala, District Rajnandgaon. VERSUS Respondent... ... 1. The State Govemment of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department Ministry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Block Education Officer, i}>io^< Mohala District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) c^^^^ Writ petition under articles 226/227pf th^ Constitution pflndiafor issuance of writ in the natyre of MANDAMUS, Certioj-aj-i, Prohibition and other suitable WRIT or writs, Order or orders, Direction or directions. ^^\ (3°^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTES6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P. No. 3017 of 2006 Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Itespondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Bhuwan Das Panika Versus The 5+ate Sovt.of Chhattisgcrh & omother W. P. No. 3018 of 2006 Nand Kumar Sahu Versus The Sta+e 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh A another W. P. No. 3019 of 2006 Bhavdas Ramteke Versus The State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh & ano-ther W. P. No. 3020 of 2006 Kdlish Singh Bhuarya Versus Tlie State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh & onother W. P. No. 3021 of 2006 Kakiram Sinha Versus T1ie State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh & another W. P. No.3022 of 2006 Mukundram Dugga Versus The State 6ovt. of Chhattisgdrh & another W. P. No. 3023 of 2006 Versus Pyonrom Yadav The Stute ©ovt.of Chhattisgarh & onother W.P.No. 3024 of 2006 Petitioner : Amruram Amila Versus Respondents ; The Statefiovt.of Chhattisgarh A another W. P. No. 3025 of 2006 Petitioner Resppndents Rameshwcn- Sing Jureshiya I Versus The State 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh & another j And W. P. No. 3026 of 2006 I Petitioner ; JagatRamSahu Versus Req)ondents : The State 6ovt. of Chhatt-isgarh & ano'ther Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri AJay Shrivastnva, Advocdte for l+ie Petitioners. Shri V.V.S. Moorthy, &y. Advocate Seneral with Smt. Anju Ahuja, &y. 6ovt. Advocate for the respondents/State. ORDER (9rt October, 2006) ; 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that while working as Assistant Teachers/Upper Division Teachers, the petitioners have gone on trainin9 to improve their qualificationson -Hieir own expenses and acquired B. Ed./B.TJ Examination Certificate. Thepresent writ petitions, being W.P. Nos. 3017/2006, 3018/2006, 3019/2006, 3020/2006. 3021/2006, 3022/2006, 3023/2006, 3024/2006, 3025/2006 and 3026/2005 involve similar facts and common question of law. Thus, these 1 petitions are being disposed of by this common order. Sront of 'l' two additional increments on obtaining B.Ed./B.TJ. Examination Certificate at own cost was withdrawn by the order dated 20.5.1998 (Annexure P/l). According to teamed counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advonce increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumur Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (II) AAPJR-C6 96}. This Court- in the case of Yashwant Kumar BharadvBaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had bbtained 1 B. Ed./B.TJ. Examination Certificate on his own expenses, are covered by -the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by +he S'tate Government of AAadhya Pradesh. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law involved in the present cases are squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Ourg and another (Supra), to which leamed counsel appearing for the respondents fairly concedes ouid agrees with the averment mdde by leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order possed I'n the case of Yashwunt Kumar Bharadwey Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and onother (5upra), subjec^ to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed./B.T.I. Examination Cerf'ificote on their own expenses or not. No orderas to costs. A copy of •this order be placed on record of other connected writ petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge SuNu*