@) H!GH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILASPUR WntJ'etjtion (S) Np. 3933 of20Q7 PETITIOMER RESPONDENTS Versus 2) 3) Teeka Ram Patei, S/o. Shri Birbal Patel, aged about 45 years, Assistant Teacher Government Primary Schooi, Teiipali, Biock Pusour, District - Raigarh, (CG). State of Ciihattisgarh, throuah the Schoo! Education t, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, CG. T'ne District Educafion Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh, (CG). The Biock Education Officer, Block Pusour, District - Raigarh (G©>. [ (Writ Petition under Articie 226 of the Constitution of india) SB: Hon'bie Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Shri Sanjay Pate!, counsei for the petitioner. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocate forthe State. (Passed on 11th Juiy, 2007) Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner as wei! as for the State/respondents jointly submit that the fact and question of iaw invoived in the present writ petition are the same to that of jn Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipai Corporation, Dura and another { 200S (ii) MPJR -CG'^6}, which has been disposed of vide order dated 3-4-2006. Learned counsei appearing for the respondents does not controvert the said submission. In subsequeni cases, i.e., Writ Petition (S) No. 4139 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma Vs. The SSate Govt. of Chhattlsgarh and " ^ < <~^^^^^^^^s?;^?§^ ^^^ ^"^t? ^ 3. another) and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-12-2006, pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995, issued by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopai and the prospectus of Diploma in Education Examination, it was ciarified ihat the nomenclature ofthe Basic Training institute i.e., B.T.I., has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingiy, the D.Ed. Certificate hoiders are aiso covered by the decision in Writ Petition (S) No. 4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verms Vs. The State Govi. ofChhattlsgarh and another (supra). Accordingly, the writ petition is aliowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Sharadwaj Vs. Municlpai Corporation, Durg and another (supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed. Examination Certificate on hls own expenses as per the circuiars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 and further whether he has been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge