^,-T GOf^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No. M\30 OF 2011. PETITIONER 4- ^..- ^^ ..•</'^.^ .^•\^ ...•" ^y....-"' 'y RESPONDENTS / Rajendra Prasad Rathore, Son ofBudhRam Rathore, aged about 40 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle School Khaira, Block Masturi, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VER S U S / : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Department of School Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) ,2. District Education Officer, District Education Office District Bilaspur (C. G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Block Masturi, District Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ ! -< HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BIL^MSPUR (Hon, Mr. .lustice Pritiolcer Oiwalcer) Writ Petition (S) No. 4130 of 2011 PETTTIONER IIESPONDENTS VERSUS Rajendra Prasad Rathore State Qf Chhattlsgarh and others Shrl Mirza Haflz Batg, counsel for the petitioner. Shrl Chandresh Shrivastava, P.L. for the State. WRTT PETCT-ION UNDER ARTXCl.E 226 OF Tfr CONSTrrUTION OP ZNDIA ORDER (04.08.2011) The petltloner who was appointe^l ©nthe post ofAssistant Teacher vide order dated 08.05.1998 (Annexure P/l) is aggneved by the action of the respondents In not adding tw@ advance Increments in his salary even though he did his B.T.I. at his own cost beforejolning the service in the year 1992. 2. Counsel for the petttloner submlts that the petltloner is entitled for two advance jncrements as he had obtained B.T.I. Examination certiflcate in accordance wlth the provislons of Ctrcular dated 24.12.98 and in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court In the matter of State of M.P. & Another Vs. Badrlnarayan Acharya and others reported (n 1996 SC 2779 and Yashwant Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. Munidpal Corporation, Durg and another reported in 2006 (II) MP3R 96 (CG). He further submlts that the case of the petltloner ts also covered in vtew of the cireular dated 05.01.2011 (Annexure P-6) Issued by the State Govrnment. 3. Learned State counsel does not dlspute the above faetual positlon. ^1 W Srj' .^' ^" ,t 'M^'''" ^' .-.<''" ^^- 4. In the facts and clrcumstances of the case, the pr®ent petition is disposed of with a dlrectlon to the petltioner to flle proper representation before respondent No.2 wtthtn three weeks from today and In the eventuatlty of making any such representatlon the same would be decided by the saKl authorlty after consldering the enttre facts of the case wlthin a perlod of three months thereafter. 5. It is made clear that thls court has not oqsressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned would toe at llberty to decide the representatlon strictly tn accordance wlth law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge