I?^.?^^ V. ^?rr^?.^^^ i'iffiUii. •£.--'-s».-.^-^-^-. IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTIS6ARH AT BILASPUR (C.&.) W.P. (S) N0. 1^0 /2010 PETETIONER o.-n'y) .^^y ^^^' ^•10" 'y^\>" RESPONDENTS : ../^.^v"yi{s»^.^ /'•y^-" ~~ '^s\, |«/&s.^p^,^5| t?X '/'-^i \ Tn\. /eSf t! Y"fa>-~-^.-^°B;ly r^RS^"^ Mamta Reddywar ©Smt. Mamta Kannanwar W/o Shri S.Kannamwar, aged about 45 years, Upper Division Teacher, Anusychit Jati Adarsh Kanya Aashram Devrikhurd, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS / 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) ^ 2. Commissioner TribleWelfare Oepartment, Raipur (C.6.) / 3. Assistant Commissioner Trible Welfare Department Composite Building Bilaspur (C.6.) .- 4. Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Bilaspur Distt. Bilaspur (C.6.) 5. Pr'incipal, Anusuchit Kayna Adarsh Kanya Asram Devrikhurd, Bilaspur (C.6.) WRIT PETCTEON U/A 226/227 OF THE CONSTn-UTtON OF INDIA ,/^-nl nl^^u^o_ift-i.ft<-+ i^^&no/'+'fiilk/ hi&n^J-n «?iihmit_ HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARHAT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1 190 of aUQ PEnnoNER RESPONDENTS : Mamta Reddywar @ Smt Mamta Kannanwar. VERSUS : State tf ChhaUsgarh & Others. Present Wrt Petltion Under Artide 226/227 OfThe Constitutlon Of India SB: Hon-Ue Shri SaUsh K. Amihotri. J. Shri K.S.Pawar, AdvocateforthepeUttoner. Shri A-V.Shridhar, Panel Lawyerforthe StatB/iespcmdents. Amit ORALORDER (Passedon22ml dayoT Mareh,2010) With the consent of l^med counsel tor the parties, the matter Is heaid flnally. 1. By thls petitlon, the petitioner seete a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments on passlng of B.Ed. examinaUon, on her own expenses, b^ore entering Into service. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petlUoner submits ihat the issue involved In the present case is no tonger res mtegiass the same has been considered and decUed by the Supreme Court in Adia Saxma v. Slate ofM.P. S OfS. as well as by Uiis Court in the matter of YastmaM Kumar Bhaiachmj v. Munlc^al Coipoiatton, Duig & ancffief and Gcyash Kumar Vwma v. The State Govt af CMattsgaih andatmllie^. 3. Shri Pawar further submits that the instant petttton is squarely covwed t>y the decisfon as aforestated. Thus, Uie petifloner may be pennttted to make a representalion to the fespondent authoriU^ to decitte her ease for grant of two irKrements in the light of aforedated ctedsion, sublect to verlffcaUon of.the fact asto whether the pefltioner t»sacquiied B.Ed. certificate on her own axpenses bdore entering into service. 4. Leamed cuinsel appearlng for the StatB/iBspontteds submtts that in the event, the pedttoner makes a representatkm, the same vwll be consktered and decided, in accoidance vrith law and in the Ight of the decisions of U»Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supia) as well as this Court in Yaslmant Kumar Bfiaiaefwa/and Qopesh Kumar Vwma (stpia), within a pertod <rf fnur weeks from the date of receipt of the representaton. 5. In view of for^oing, accoidirs to the leamed counsel appearog for tte pdiBoner, nothing survives In this petition for adjudicaltan. 6. Accordingly, the wrtt peUtton is disposed cf. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge