^' ^<r6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No. 15030 OF201P. PETITIONER r^'-\' *0...-"x^' M?<^ .'7^C--' A^'WA'ff-' Mfy sy\N?-y <•?"' °^' ..-& liy . . ..?•?>°' e<y ^' v.--/v\l\\0 ^y ^ Vinish Shah, S/o. Shri Banshi Lal Shah, aged about 45 years, R/o. infronf of Balaji Tent House, Frazerpur, Jagdalpur District Bastar (C. G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS , : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretaiy, School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) 2. District Education Officer, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C. G.) 3. Block Education Officer, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C. G.) 4. Treasury Officer, Treasuiy Account and Pension, Jagdalpur, District Bastar (C. G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WHW Sh*(lch 'Src} '<l|q|(-1't|, gnl'H'IS, fqiTll'My L£:...Q?.l...(^e:.:.^^if!p Sff^I tra^T ('ipf^al^q) sn^i 'w ft-fi't '^sn 3T^?I sb^iics TRITW llfef 311^1 21.10.2010 Shri Soiiusant Venna, couns Shri Praveen Das, Dy. G.A. f} T'he petitioner, who was Assistant Teacher under the Schd 8.8.96 (Aiuiexure P/1) is aggrij respondents iii not addiag two ad'u| even tliough he did his D.Ed. frcfi Maa.dal, Raipur at his own cost seeking permission. £>rfhe saiise fr| Counsel for f&e petitioner s|i entifled for two advan.ee iacreineil Exami&ation certificate, in Circular dated 24.12.98 aad in Supreiae Court ui ttie niatter of Badruiarayaa Achaiya and othei^ aad Yashwaat Kumar Bhanlwail Durg and aaother reported in 200 On the other hand, counstl erstsvhile State of Madhva Pt: 22.10.1964 allowed advance ^overanient servaats who pro^; 22.10.1964 whefher at his own However, wlio proceeded on trauuti; ;et two arinual iaci^xaents onlv ifl 'l for fhe petitioners. br fhe State. c 4f^l<fh ltTRdf ^ fs^ <^1^1< ^aiRraan^r accorfiance vielw on the post of |ol Education Departiaent on ived bv the acuon of fhe jaace increiuents in bis salary tni C.G. Madlivam.ik Shiksha |tn tlie year June 2007 after >m. tlie departm.ent. lubtnits that the peti.tioner is tts as be had obtauied D.Ed wifh the provisions of of the judgments of HonTble IState of M.P. ?» Another Vs. reported in 1996 SC 2779 Vs. Municipal Corporation, ^ (II) MPJR 96 (CG). for the State submits fhat hadesh vide circular dated ^iicreinents only to ttiose •eeded for training up to or at the govemnient cost. on or affcer 23.10. 1954 caa fhe trainiag is at his cost c<l>st XI-HC—78 75T ^WM<i, ^Tily'lfo, fst01^1j,< _^.....U......Q:..C5>.^....^;...^.^k f 200 sn^i Traq? ('^3^1) an^l w f<;-f1+ "^sn 3TT^?T ^)4i^> TOiiwdfei sn^i Govemknent Rul4s r woulld conditifen ate not at the cost of the 23.10.1964 was superceded vid( Govemiaent vide notificated dsj Non-Gazette Class-II Educational Recruitaient and Prouiotion B.T.I. or B.Ed degree for appoin^ Teacher. The petitioner increinents onlv in fhe B.T.I/B.Ed./B.T.I. degree at his| obtainiag permission forin the d< to 1.3.99. To clarify the above been issued on 6.2.2007 and on Facts, as detafled above, fhe niatter of Yashwant Kum.ar discussing fbie circulars dated upon ttie judgment. of the Badruiarayan Acharya's case (• not assistant teachers alone, iacreraents on obtaiiung B. 22.10.1964, as fhe circular prescribe any outer luait of fhe ^ & B.T.I. certi&cate. It has been 1.3.99 is appUcable to only other teachers (UDT). Shri Das fairly subiaits Yashwant Kuniar Bhmadwaj's c^ Hon'ble wotuld Assidtant tllfct cf)T^crt<i^'T *ii+icff ^T fs%^ <f^it$i< ^3ifW3D^?I This circular of dated order dated 10.12.1975. The gjted 16.6.1973 amended M.P. Services (Non-coflege Services) i, 1993 added qiiaUfication of i^nient on the post of Assistaat be enttfled for advan.cc that he had obtaiaed his own cost duritlg service after [•partment betayeen 23.10.1964 ijosition, circulars have ah-eady ti0.1.09. not in dispute. This Court in Bharadwaj (supra) elaborately 124.12.98, 1.3.99 aud relying Apex Court in. fhe luatter of i^ipral has held fhat teachers, be entifled to two advaoce exai£iiaation certiiicate after Idated 22.10.1964 does not t)eriod ofobtainmR B.Ed, M.Ed •ftirther held fhat circular dated. Teachers (LDT) and not to principle oflaw laid down in se (supia} has attamed fuialily <- [-HC—78 *I!H<?(T ^itirai ~5^ -<iww^, wdww, ^wwy. ..£...^.2...1\(-.:..-^1^ 3^?l r^V (lj°lF^«|ti'?) 3n^vw R-ii'* ?TSSTT 3iT^{ ^i+iic^ T^ITW ^lfei SIT^I aad case of fhe pentioaer in covered by fhe above judgin 24.12.1998. * For the aferesaid reasons, payinent of two advaace iacreiuei of fhe petitioner's D.Ed. examin arc accordiagly directed to im increinents to fhe petitioner from examiaation, withia a period However, this order shall be subj the State reganling facts pleaded No onler as to costs. <!M<l(<vl<fh TTTR^ff Tf fe1CSt' '^R$R ^siRiiisn^r \his pention is also squarely ^nt as also circular dated Uie petitioner is entitled to fhe its froni fhe date of declaration ation result. The respondents lce payment of two advance fhe date ofher passing D.Ed. of four m.onfhs froni today. 'ct to aU veii&cations inade bv ia ffae petition. Sd/- pritinkerDiwakar Judge