5 IN THE HJGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S) No. "^p 12QW \\ PETITIONER ...•• ;.. ^ Smt. Smita Ghosh W/o Shri Sandeep o n.^\..-'" /' Kumar Ghosh, Aged about 46 years, \<v .••1\S'-<^' Occupation - Lecturer, Govt. Hir. Sec. '..•"^.•••'\3^" School J.P. Nagar Camp 2 Bhilai Distt. ^:^y ..^yy <"^'- RESPONDENTS Durg (CG). VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) /2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur (C.G.) ^. District Education Officer District Durg (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ^>:.X(.HC-22 ^^ an^r'^l h-U'K 3DJRI ^Hicft ^i^ ^-\ •T5T -i<l^ld-4, t»T?ly'IS. i««YII'M1< STT^T iRra? 'A;}v>-e;- *il1CTI Olliqi .^^•"•^/'L fe^CT' sn^i^aiw^ifei SB: Hon'bte Shri Manindra Nlohan Shrivastava. J 10^1-2011 Shri Vipin Tiwrari, counset Ipr Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Law^er for the Heard. Leamed counsel appearinb for the petitioner sutwnlts that <fte petitioner is entitled to beneflt of two adv^nce increments on account of she having passed B.Ed examinaUon befotfe her appointment at her own cost. It is submitted that the issue involv^d in the present petition is no longer res integra and the same has been fihaliy decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Gourt in the case of Asha Saxena vs. IState ofM.P. & Ofs.. 2009 1) MPJR (SQl for the petifioner further draw4 increments as per circular dated with a direction to the respondent «iii''<I<-f41-i ^wi-S ^ fs^S ^Rnt(i< ^;3if:?n aii^i the petitioner. State/respondents. S9. It is further submitted mat friis Court has also taken a simitar view in its order dated 06-02-2009 passed iji W.P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. Learned counse! attention of this Court to order dated 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appe^l No.124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court ifi the case of Asha Saxena (supra} and the order passed by this Court in s|nother Writ Appeal No.87ffi009, directions have been issued for considerapon of the case for grant of two advance 21-09-1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verific^ion ofthe f^cte pleaded in the petifion. Leamed counsei fbr the re^pondents submits that case of the petitioner would also be considered on the Aame tines. In view of the statement m^de above, ttiis petition is flnaity disposed off authorities to consider and decide the ciaim [Tft^?fea ^- Xt-Hf-22 's^ •^WW1^, »T)I'H*IS. facii'yy *<|t|dT Shlich sn^ T^SR ..^.fl^A..'^?.. "^ ' 200 f^^T' SD^I^I Vw* sn^w sb^ich ^^ sn^i ?^<tiw(ri?!( ^9 ^)T^fI<Tl'41l 'RTR^f ^ 'f^t iFsl^K ^; sipaii an^a of the petitioner for grant of two a 21-09-1974 issued by the Stete of facts pieaded in the petition within a {Ivance incremente as per cirouiar dated prtadhya Pradesh, after verificatton of the Iperiod of eight weeks from today. DeepU Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge [TTt^-efea