'^f '^^U^ ^•E&-—^C^^K^ C f- 1 3V IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH WRTT PETITION fSLN0^8^ OF 2007 PETITIONER: '-" Smt. Deepti Agrawal, W/o S.K. Agrawal, Aged about 39 years, Presently posted and working as ,o'1r..--''S\^/~ Lecturer, Govemment Natwar Multi Higher Secondary School, Raigarh (CG). ^w ^ •; ^^.-- Versus RESPONDENTS : /'' 1. ,^ State ofChhattisgarh Through the Secretary, Department of Education, D.K.S. Building, Mantralaya, Raipur, CKhattisgarh. ^,'^-^'-'- , 2. District Education Officer, |iy)"1 ' ^ -Dist. Raigarh (CG). . v1 0'~ 3. Principal, Govemment Natwar Multi Higher Secondary School, Raigarh (CG). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^ c^^ HIGH COimT OF CHHATriSflARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BtE MR. SATISH K.AGNIHOTRI. J. ;(?-~ Petitionere WRIT PETITION (S.) N0^82 OF 2007 Sundw Lat Patel and anottier vereus Respondents : StateofChhatt^artiandottiers PeUtioner WRIT PETrriON (S.l N0.283 OF 2807 Puna Ram Sahu versus Respondents : SteAeGovtofChhatttegarhandothers Petitioner WRTT PETmON (S.l N0.204 OF 2007 Ram KumarSalame 1 vsrsus i • ' • ' ' " . . . • • ' . ' • Respondents : StateOovt.ofGhhattisgarhanctothws WRIT PETmON (S.) N0.266 OF 2087 PeUtioner : HsmantKumarSalame VSRUS Resoondents : Stato Qovt. of ChhatSsgartt and othars ~\'l^t\' ^ Patttioner PeBUoner WRrrPETmON (8.1 N0^88 OFMOT Budhnath Sai Paikra varsus Stote of ChhatUsgarh and oBwn WRTT PETITION (S.t N0587 OF »07 Madan Lal Sahu versus Respondents : State of Chhatt^aih andothere Petttioner MSfirr PETITION (S.) NO^eeOF 2007 PUamber Patel versus Rbspondente : State of ChhatUsgarh and othara Petitioner WRIT PeTmON (S.) N0^70 OF 2007 Trinsrth Chou(*ia(y vereus Respondents : State of ChlMrtfegarh antfothers UiiaaS'B PeUUoner WIOT PETITION (S.i NO.M1 at 2fl07 SnA DeepUAgrawal I versus Rsspondents : State of ChhatBsgarh and othere Preserrt : Mr. R.S.Patel, Mr. Ravl Maheshwari, Mr. Rahul Jha and Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, counsel for the petiUoner(s). Mr. Sushil Dubsy, Govemment Advocato and Mr. Satteh Gupta, Deputy Govemment Advocate for the State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 19UI Day of January, 2007) Leamedcounsel appearing for ttie partias joinUy submit <hat the faicts and quedton of law involved inthepraserrt brtch of wrtt petiBons are squarely coversd by the decision of Ults Court in Ihe case of Ya^wnmt Kumar Bftwadimrf vs. MunlclfMl Ctwporatton, Du/g wid anottieia. 2. In subsequentcases, IA., Writ PetiBon (S.) No.4130of 2005 (flopesft Kurosr yerma v. The State Sovi. of Chhatthywh md anolhBi) and other connected matten, dectded by this Court on ! ' • . ' '••'•• 1?-12-2006, pursuanttothe memo dated 28-1-1996, isaued. by the Secretary, Board ofSecondary EducaUon, Bh(^>al and the prospectus of Diploma in EducaUon Examination, it was ctaitfied that the nomenclature of tto Bseic Training InsUtute, i.s., B.T.I. has been changed and renamed — Dlptoma in Eduerfon, t.e., D£d. Accoidlngly, the D.Ed. CertlflcatB holttois are riso cwwsd ty th» decision In Writ PeUtton (S.) No.4130 of 2006 (Gopesh /(umar Venw vs. The State Govt. of ChhaWsgaih ancfanothei) (Supra). 3. For the trforementioned reasons, the writ petlttgns are dtsposed of in tenns of the decl^on of thte Court 1» the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bhaiadwai (Supra), subject to veriflcation of the fect r . • • ' '. • • .. • ' • as to whether the petiUoners have acquired B.EdTB.T.I^D.Ed. i' • .' eertfflcates at ttieirown expenses as per ths cirGutarsdated 24-12- f ! ' ' ' ' " ' (998 and 1-3-1999 and further v*ether they have been paid two advance increments or not. Noorderasto costs. 4. A copy of this order be ptaced on the record of the connected writ petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 00|Ml i 20oegoMpJR.ca 96