Ijl the Honble Hioh Courtof Chhattishflarh at Bilaspur (C.G.) W.P. (S) No. 68 2.g/2006 Petitioner "^' Respondent f^O^ ..^^-i*-'' ;^&^'7^-r" ^1^€^^^T^ffi£ -Smt. Vijaya Kumari Tandan, Aged 42 years S/0 Shri D.L. Tandan, Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Hir. Sec. School. Utai, District, Durg (C.G.) VE RS U S 1,-The State Government of Chl'icilli'iligai Through the Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) <y lt>^ ^^- 2 The BtoC(< Education Officer, Durg (C.G) Writ petition under articles 226/22^ of the Constitutk>ii of indja for issyan^e of wnt in the nature of IVIANDAMUS, Certiorari, Prohibition and other suitable WRIT ojr writs^ Order or orders, DJrection or directions. XI-HC-78 *11*1C11Sh*11<h 3^'^iraRTO, OTfl+i'is, [siciitiy _io^-(^^- ^8^/06,. ^ 200 311^1 4d* (l^3^8T) an^T^TR-ii* (raTSIIcSWshlit) ?^nwnf?(T3n^r 11.12.2006 Shri Ajay Shrivastava, oounsel Smt. Anju Ahuja G.A. for the The petitioner is working as School. In the course of her servicet certificate at her own expenses before I According to learned counsel fof two advance increments in view of thel Yashwant Kumar Bharadw»i Vs. f|3r the p^itioner. re^pondents/State. Urtper Diviston Teacher in Govemment the petitioner tes obtained B.Ed. t.3.1999. the petitioner, petitioner is entitied to decislon of this Court in the case of Municioal corooraUon. Durn and another reoorted in 2006 i2) MPJR 4- CG 96. This Court in »ieoase of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Mun| (supra), came to the conciusion th^t B.Ed./B.T.i. Examlnaticn Certlficate on| the circular dated 24.12.1998 issued Pradesh. Further in the matter of Smt Manorama Shrivastaw Vs. State of tt>y M.P. and others reoorted in 2000 f1 Administrative Tribunai, Gwalior Benctl 1.3.1999 wherein it is provided that| acquired B.Ed. degree at their cwn co^ shali be entitled to two advance incretnents case of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava others [Mssed in Original Application Np. wherein it is observed that the circulbr applicable retrospectiveiy. Thus, a tea^her has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.) increments. •sbi^fd'ifl-i iii(iTfftecA'<Ri«i< ^iSTf^ITSD^T ;ipal Corporation, Duig and another t the teachere, who had obtalned their own expenses, are covered by the State Govemmert of Madhya MPLSR 136, the MEdhya Pradesh while considering the cirajiar dated the Assistant Teachers who have ^t between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 hnents, relied on the decision in the |Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and b. 1632/19W decided on 12.10.1999 dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made may be Assistant Teacher, who 8.1999 is entitled to two advanced P.T.O. XI-HC-78 f-ITHcn Sh*1|th TSf^WvW, WT5\w\e, Isiciiuy ^.p. C^- ^c.(° .6& ^200 311^!>1 4sl<h ('i?!^^) gn^T?>TRaN; (WTSn^Tshllt) \-i- ¥R[)WflfN'3t1^T It is pointed out by the learned |hat the then State of Madhya Pfadesh| toainst the orders passed by the Tribui|ial i|lismissed the Special Leave Pditton N^. i|if the tribunal. Therefore, the directton 'I.3.19S9 cannot be made applicable retrf ttiecomes final and the same shatl Ue Feaohere, who have obtained B.Ed./BT) ^irther substantiated by a circular datec| $tate of Madhya Pradesh wherein th^ (jecision ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court. Learned counsel for the petitjone)' ounsel appearing for tfie petiticmer had filed a Special Leave Petition and the Hon'ble Supreme Court 1999/2000 ffled agasnst the onfer to the effect that the cirouiar dated aspecUvely, passed ty the Tribunal, |e aFplicable to all the Assistant certjficates brfore 1.3.1899. It is 17.10.2003 issued by the pnesent cireular oleariy states about the juestion of law involved in the preser cjovered by the decision of this Court ^haradwaj (supra) to whlch iwrn< r^spondent/State fairly concedes and a^ famed counsel appearing for the petitior^ Accordirgly, the writ petition is. ofwn expenses as per the circular dated w] jrees with the averments made by >n0r. jllowed in terms of the decision of is Court in the matter ofYashwant Kuaifir Bharadwaj subject to verification the fact as to whether the petitioner h^s acquired B.Ed. certifioate at her 2+.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 ana'fcrther lincrements or not. No order as to tiether she has been paid two advance C<)StS. =bl'i|fd41-f t)|t<cll'fffcl<rl <R]t&i< SpSt^ITSTI^T further submlts that the facts and t case of petitioner are squarely in ttie case of Yashwant Kumar d eounsel appearirg for the Sd/- DhirendraMisbra Judge P.T.O.