@ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTI’SGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 3&8 of2007 PETITIONERS : 1. Mahendra Singh Aged abcut 41 year, Asstt. Teacher S/o Late Shri Narayan Singh Primary School Mundadiha Block —- Bastar, DistL ~ Bastar (C.G.) 2. Rajesh Goliwar Age about 35 year, Asstt. Teacher S/o Shri Sudhakar Goliwar Primaxy School Ichchhapur, Block — Bastar,Distt.- Bastar(C.G.) . Buddhuram Padhe Age about ‘33 yeat, Asstt. Teacher S/o Shri Budhram Padhe Primary School Chhote Alnar Block — Bastar, Distt. — Bastar (C.G.) VERSUS : 1. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary Tribal Welfare Deyartmem 8c Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Disit — Raipur (C.G.) 2. Disu'ict Education O$cer Bastar District ~ Bastar (C.G.) 3. Block Education omcer Bastar District — Bastar(c.G.) 4. Treasure, Accounts & Pemion, Bastar,‘ District — Bastar (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA RS ESPONDENT Single'Bench : Hon’ble Justice Shri’Satish K. Agnihotlih ~ Present: ‘ Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for the petitioners. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State lrespondents. ORDER (Passed on 11m day of July, 2007) l. Learned counsel appearing for the petitionersas Well as for the State/respondents jointly submit that the fact and question of law involved in the present wn't petition are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (II) MEIR—CG 96}, which has been disposed of. vide order dated 03.04.2006. Learned counsel appean'ng for the respondents does not controvert the said submission. In subsequent cases, i.e., Writ Petition (3,) No.4130 of 2005 (Gapesh Kumar Vermu vs. He State Govt. of Chhuttisgarh and another) and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15- 12-2006y pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995; issued by the Seoretary9 Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospectun of Diploma in Education Examination, it was clarified that the nomenclature of the Basic Training Institute, i.e., B.T‘I. has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Certificate holders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (S.) No.4l30 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma vs. 17w State Govt. of Chhottisgarh and another) (Supra), . Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms ofthe order passed in the case of Yashwant Knmar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to verihcation of the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired D.Ed. Examination Certiticate on their own expenses as per the circulars dated z4.12.l998 and 0103,1999 and iiirther whether they have been paid two advance increments or not, No order as to costs. l i ¢\ j Satish K.Agnihott‘i : ‘ Judge Sd/-