5h, \‘9’ <§ HI\ GH COURT OF CHHATTISGA§H AT BILASPUR W.P. (5) No. 5531 OF 2008 PETITIONER Smf. Kalpana Girolkar‘ RESPONDENTS STaTe Govt of Chhaf‘risgar‘h & ors \ POST FOR ORDERs ON 5”}:EBRUARY 2009 sd/— Judge QCoz. 2009 w KN ; ’klji’liréndra Mishra :9 HIGH COURT OF CHHAT‘ESGARH AT BILASPUR w.P. (s) No. 5531 OF zoos PETITIONER Sm’r. Kalpana Girolkar‘, w/o Blakrishan Girolkar, aged abou’r 5O years, Assistan? Teacher Government Sadar Primary School Janjgir, Block Nawagarh, Dis-tricf Janjgir-Champa (CG) RESPONDENTS 1. Sfa‘re Govt of Chha‘r’risgarh, Through The Secremry Educafion Depar’rmen‘r, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, DisT'l: - Raipur (C.6.) 2. The Dis’rr‘ic‘r Educafion Officer, Disfric‘r Janjgir—Champa (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Block Nawagarh,, Dish‘. Janjgir Champa (6.6.) Present Mr. Ashwani Shukla, Advoca’re for' fhe pefifioner. Mr. ‘y’.S. Thakur, Depufy Advocafe General for The Sfafe, ORDER (Passed on 0_é_. 2. 2009) Dhirendra Mishra J: 1. The pefifioner, who was appointed as Assis’ran’r Teacher on 7.11.1979 under fhe School Education Department, is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not adding two advance increments in her salary even though she obtained certificate of 'Bal Sevika Training Course’ from the Indian Council for Child Welfare, M.P. Bhopal, though the document of Annexure P—3 i.e. memo issued by the Education Department of the Government of M.P. to the Director, Public Instruction, specifically clarifies that candidates who are under government service and possessing Bal Sevika Training certificate will be entitled to all the facilities as are applicable to trained lady teachers employed in the' Primary Schools under the State Government for the purposes of pay scales and advance increments. 2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is entitled for two advance increments, as she had obtained Ba! Sevika Training certificate before her appointment as Assistant Teacher, in accordance with the provisions of Circular dated 24.12.1998, which was issued on the basis of l I decision of The Hon’ble Supreme Cour’r in The maHer of State of M.P. & another Vs. Badrinarayan Acharya & others reported in AIR 1996 SC 2779 as also document of Annexure P-3 which clarifies that candidates who are under government service and possessing Bal Sevika Training certificate will be entifled to all the facilities as are‘applicable to trained lady teachers employed in the Primary Schools under the State Government for the purposes of pay scales and advance increments. . On the other hand, Mr. Thakur, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing for the State of Chhattisgarh submitted that erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide circular dated 22.10.1964 allowed advance increments only to those government servants who proceeded for training up to 22.10.1964 whether at his own cost or at the government cost. However, who proceeded on training on or after 23.10.1964 can get two annual increments only if the training is at his cost and not at the cost of the Government. This circular of dated 23.10.1964 was superceded vide order dated 10.12.1975. The Government vide notification dated 16.6.1973 amended M.P. Non—Gazette Class-II Educational Services (Non- college Services) Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 1993 added qualification of B.T.I or B.Ed. degree for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher. The petitioners would be entitled for advance increments only in the condition that they had obtained their BTI/B.Ed. degree at their own cost during service after obtaining permission from the department between 23.10.1964 to 1.3.1999. To clarify above position circulars have already been issued on 6.2.2007 and recently on 30.1.2009. . I have heard learned counsel for the parties. . Facts, as detailed above, are not in dispute. This Court in the matter of Vashwant Kumar Bhardwaj Vs Municipal Corporation, Durg and another reported in 2006 (2) MPJR-CG 96 elaborately discussing the circulars dated 24.12.1998, 1.3.1999 and relying upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Badrinarayan Acharya’s case (supra) has held that teachers, not assistant teachers alone, would be entitled to two advance increments on obtaining B.Ed. examination certificate after ’ 3 5‘ g/ 22.10.1964 , as The circular dafed 22.10.1964 does no? prescribe any om‘er‘ Iimif of ’rhe period for obfaining B.Ed., M.Ed. & B.T.I. certifica’re. If has been furfher‘ held Tha’r Circular‘ dafed 1.3.1999 is applicable ‘ro only Assistan'l‘ Teachers (LDT) and no’r fo other feachers (UDT). 6. Mr. Thakur, learned Dy Adv. General for The Sfafe fairly submifs fhaf principle of law laid down in Yashwanf Kumar Bhardwaj‘s case (supra) has affained finalify and case of The petitioners in all These pefifions are squarely covered by The above judgmenT as also circular daTed 24.12.1998. He also does noT dispuTe The documenT of Annexure P-3' i.e. memo issued by The EducaTion DeparTmenT of The GovernmenT of M.P. To The DirecTor, Public InsTrucTion. 7. For The aforesaid reasons, The peTiTioner is enTiTled To The paymenT of Two advance incremenTs from The daTe of appoinTmenT of The peTiTioner on The posT of AssisTanT Teacher. The respondenTs are accordingly direcTed To make paymenT of Two advance incremenTs To The peTiTioner from The, daTe of her appoinTmenT wiThin a period Two monThs from Today. However, This order shall be subjecT To all verificaTions made by The STaTe regarding facTs pleaded in The peTiTion. 8. No order as To cosTs. Judge $02.09 5di- l l l” bhirendra Mishra I Roshan/