VVRIT PFTITION l-'NhFR ARTTd_E 22A / 227 OF 'WE / A, ^ -.^_ --__.. , )n,j.qTTTtJTmN OF TMhTA FOR T.S.SUAN^F OF .SUTTAR! F l^y—-.-..-,-./..,———....—^— —...^, ,C^WRIT. -WRITS. MRECTION ETC TO b0 JUSTIcEIN THE ^v^,. ..„-., ..„-.„, ^-..^.^..^.^ <$• IR' l? ^ liCI Jl s r df^foo^- 61-1 COURT OF JUhTCATlJRF CHU.AmKf.AkH.AT RTl & c.m V^IS} NQ, ^£?0 / 2006 h'CTST'oRer .^^ Teekarn Kumar Thawait,y S/o Shri Vishnu Prasad, Agedebout 38 yeaps, Asst.Teacher 6overnmer,t \^ii^^ "> '.'••"'.^•M^i--"" .•••":-^^' .-\"' ' ~\^ ^:,^ /•-1" H'st; Janjgiff Champa-(C.6.) €^. ^' ^' \/t»ys^a2a? Stats of Chha*tis§arh ^ Through - The Seeretary, bepar-tmer'.t of Scheo! EA &.K.S. Bhawan, Ratpur, DEST : RW .».. trenOfffcer^ pa-(C.& , &?st : .Tanjgff Champs- (C.6.) ^o *AA-nS-t< Y'<r' J't.A HI6H COURT OF CHHAmSSARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (s) No. 5090 of 2006 ^ Petitioner Teekam Kumar Thawait Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others Single Bench: Hon'ble M.r. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate for the Petitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. 6ovt. Advocate for the respondents/State. OftDER <i^- rth (18tn September, 2006) 1. Learned counse! appearing for the petitioner submits that while working as Assistant Teacher, the petitioner has gone on trsining to improve his qualifications on his own expenses and acquired B. Ed. Examination Certificate on 2.9.1995 from Barkatullah University, Bhopa! (Annexure P/3). 2. According to Seamed counsel for the petitioner, ths petitioner is entitled to two advance increments in view of the decision of tiiis Court in the case of Yashwant 5(umar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipa! Corporation, Durg and onother {2006 CEI) MPJR-CS 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and anothep (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, had obtained B. Ed. Examination Certificate on his own expenses, are covered by ^SSS'SBsWes.x.SEKtn^-i:; ^ I... the circular dated 24.12.98 (Annexure P/l) issued by the State Sovernment of Madhya Pradesh 3. Learned counse! for the petitioner further submits -tiiat the facts and question of !aw involved in the present case are squarety covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipat Corporation, tSurg and Gnother (Supra), to which leamed counsel appearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counse! appearing for the petitioner. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Ourg and another (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner hns acquired B. Ed. Examination Certifi'cate on his own expenses or not. No order Thakur ss to costs. S(V- Satis iud^