c^ mGH CX)URT QF CHHATTI8GAMH AT_BHASPUR >•/ PETITIONER RE8PONDENTS WriltPcitiEtM>n(S)No,13%^f2W» Sarojbala Chandrikapure D/o B.R. Chandrikapire Aged about 42 years, R/o Ma^rpara Ambedkar Nagar, Bilaspur VERSUS 1. State ofChhattisgarh throu^i tfae Secretary, Departmetrt of Sehool Education, DKS Bhawan, Raipur, District Raiptu- 2. The Distriet Education OfiBcer Bilaspur, District Bilaspir 3. The Block Education Officer, Bilha, District Bilaspur (WRIT PETmON UNDER ART1CLE 226 OF THE C»NSTmJTIONOF INDIA) (SRJIon'Ue Mr. Satish K. Asnihotri, J.) Present : Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri A.8. Kachhwaha, Deputy Advocate Oeneral for fhe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 03"' ofMarch, 2W8) 1. Learned eounsel appeariag for the petitioner as well as for Ihe State/respotrients jointly submits tfiat the fact aad question of law involved in tiie present Writ Petition are Ae same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bhardwaj Vs, Minucipal Corporation, Durg and another (2006(11) MPJR-CG 96}, which has been disposed of vide order dated 03.04.2006 and the order dated 07.02.2007, passed by this Court in W.P (S) No. 697 of 2007 (A.N.V. Satyanarayan & uthers Vs. State of CMiattisgarh & others). 2. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms ofthe order passed in the case ofYashwant Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. Municipal Corporatton, Dui^ and anofher (Supra) and W.P.(S) No. 697 of 2007 (Supra), subject to verification of the facts asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.Ed Exammation Certificate on his own expeiises as per the circulars dated - 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999 and farther whether he has been paid two advance increments or not. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agmhotri Judge