r" ;NCI IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETITION fSI N0. ^95^ /2010 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. PETITIONER ^ ^ ^' v <-^r .<-»"*'' ..*-." 1t"e£:A...---"^' '^ :^'v RESPONDENTS Narendra Ramteke, aged about 48 years, son of Shri Chinde Lal Ramteke, occupation - Asst. Teacher, Presently working as Head Master, Govt. Primary School - Mugdaha, Vikash Khand -Mohala, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). 1.' State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Tribal, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Asst. Commissioner, Deptt of Tribal, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) 3. • Joint Director (Treasury, A/c & Pension), Raipur (CG) 4. " Block Education Officer, Block - Mohala, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). 01. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PETITIONER sn^i'^i'i^N; 'tTO SII^l *t<i4i "ysi "Ml'^lcd, »iliy<|(o,I^TRTy . u&^GV)v^.^^[ sn^?rw (<^'^J^) SB : Hon'uie Shri Manindra rsiohai qiFlfepfrT iffq^' ^ ft^t "rfsR^R ^sffinsKi?! 29^7-2Q10 Shri A.N.Bhakta, counsel for S'nri Vinod Tekam, Panel La |the petitioner. for the State. Layyer rieara. TOF Leamed counsel appearing is entitlsd to benefrt of frwo advai't passeu D. i.i. exarnination ueTorei subrnineu that the issue in'voived integra and the sarrie has been flnaf in the case of Asha Siaxena vs. arfiws os. ii is Tunner suDrriiuea inai inis] order dated 06-02-28)9 oassed counset for the Detitioner further 29-04-2010 passed in Vv'rit Appeal judgrnent of the Supreme Court in orusr passed by this Court in an4t nave ueen issueu Tor consiuerauorn increments as per cireuiar uated 2 rraaesn.'aner venTicaiion OT ine T'aci D6titioner v»'ouldalso be considered in view of the statement malde oiT vvith a direction to the responagni ?r the petitioner submits that the pstitioner ice increments on account of he having nis appoinimem ai nis own cosi. 11 is in ine preseni petiiion is no ionger res ^iy decided by the Hon uie Supreme Court ^te ofM.P. & Ors.. 2009 w) sSPJR ,'SC) Court has aiso taken a similar view in its in Vv.P.(S)No.o257 of 2008. Learned attention of this Court to order dated ''io.1^4 OT '^uuy, wnsrein reiying upon trie he case of Asha Saxena (supr'a) and the tthsr Vvrit Appeai No.87/2009, directions of the case for grant of t«o advance -09-1974 issued bv the State of ivladhya :s pieaded in the petition. LearneQ counset Tor tna repponQents suurnrts triat tne case OT tne on the sarne iines. aoove, tnis peiinon 'is Tinaiiy aisposeu nt autnoiities to consider and decide the r»f.ti<FIW—FS/I47—2/2010 —1,00,000. 1 H ( )^fch.l^ all ^bbS^ •<t^Wt >h'ftl!^l®j'9!,K.[ll®'hWMh^ !s£. SS&SS-^t •w'SSsSSa •;i;:;*-^'.:;'-si -L — agpnf . teABiSBAuqs UBqo]/\[ BJpuiUBM -/PS liw. uoi}|ied ©14u' pepeejd SIOBJ ein no aM}^-'5 psnssi 1?Z8!-~SO~S-Z PalBp ;o luejB joi jeuo!}i}ed eq} p) UJJBJO 'Aepoi luo-y s?j9e.<A }UBje jo pOUSQ B U! 10 uoneauusA -ieuB 'USSPBJ,-! BAUDBM 'o 93 jBinojio jed se siusiusjaui SOUBADB o<u I^UiEiffljiEi^ 1>.SJ h jUhlh >.(bl.>fe|lfe u^iteBai&sAiiaa. AjbiSK^USlbB. tblkb) llb Ssyif