3:: F""‘ Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Duvidha, Block Kawardha, Distt. Kabirdham (c.G.) 1U /5. Smt. Asha Gupta, W/ o Shri Khubchand Gupta, aged about 49 years, working as Head mistress, working as Govt. Primaly School Domartola, Block Shashlohara, Distt. Kabirdham (C.G.) (‘6. Salik Ram Markam S/o Shri Shriram Markam, aged about 4O years, working as Head Master, Govt. ' Primary School Singhangarh, Block Shashlohara, District Kabirdham (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS ,gV‘ . State 0f Chhattisgarh Through :- The Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer, 'Kawardha, District Karbirdham (C.G.) @ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF'INDIA. WW" [‘3 200 . WQCgvm$$%/,{ mm (Wm mwm mmm WWW WWt‘fWW awfmm RITINKER DIWAKER SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P' 07.10.2010 Shri Somkant Vex-ma, cou Shn' Vaibhav Goverdhan, Grievance of the petitionats in the present petition is that though they are entitled for two advance increments but the same has not been given to thex Counsel for the petition squarely covered with the decis No, 3977;2003 on 3.4.06 and. e at this stage the petitioners z petition with liberty to file a fre: copy of this order. State counsel submits that Without veriiying the correct factual position he cannot make any statement at this stage. However, if the case of the pe the petitioners in W.P. No. 397 any such representation, t accordance with law. Accordingly the petition present petin‘on with the afor tiling any representation by the month from the date of rece' expected from the competent accordance with law preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt. of copy nsel for th€ peu‘tioners. P.L. for the Stats. n. ers submits that their case is ion of this Court passe§ in W.P. nds ofjustice would be served if lre permitted to withdraw this ;h representation along with the ers are identical to the case of [2003 and the petitioners make same would be decided in are permitted to withdraw the liberty. In the eventuality of petitioner within a period of one t of copy of this order, it is uthoritv to decide the same in w“ f this order. h' ‘ h e e n 'd mm ' X&:.Q..:.HL%D.Q&.;...$‘8 55' C» o 200 WWW would be at liberty to minutely The authority concerned examine the case of the petiteoners comparing the same with in WP. No. 3977f2003 and they roPriate order in accordance with WW WTW amfmm the case decided by this Court would be at liberty to pass app: law. It is made clear that th opinion on merits of the cas would be at liberty to decide t with law. .s Court has not expmssed any e and the authority concerned he representation in accordance Sdl- Pritinker Diwaker Judge 311%?! m (W21)