V S.B. (Service Matterl IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARm WRIT PETiTloN (S) NO. SS§1 /201 1. /. PETmONER: Fhirat Lal Sahu, son of Ram Prasad Sahu, aged about 5'7 years, working as Upper Division Teacher, residence of viHage Khajri, Post Pawni, Tahsil Bhilaigarh, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Versus Respondents 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaxy Education Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. zf’bistrict Education offmer, District Baioda Bazar, Chhattisgarh. 3fBiock Education Ofiicer, Kasdole, Distn‘ct Raipur, Chhatu‘sgarh. , 4. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G WRITa PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR, SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAifKER ‘ ’ w.p4s‘.uo. 5551/2011 PETITIONER Khusiram Sahu State of (LG. 3t. Others Shri K.P.Sahu, counsel for the patitioner. Shri A.V.Shridhar, P.L. for the State. WRIT PETITION ‘UNDER‘ARTICLE 226 OF THE GON$TITUTION OF INDIA ORDER (19.09.2011) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to benem of two advance increments on account of he having passed. B.T.I. examination in the year 1975 befoxe his appointment at his own cost. It is submitted. that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res iniegra and the same has been many decided by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashe $axena Vs. State of M.P. & 01's. 2009 (III’MPJR (SC) 59. It is further submitted that this Court has also taken a similar View in its order dated 6.2.2009 passed in W.P.{S) No. 6257/2008. Counsel for the pen'tionexs further submits that the order dated 29.4.2010 passed in Writ Appeal NO. 124/2009, wherein relym'g upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Asha Swim \ , I (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another Writ Appeal No. 87/2009, directions have been issued for consideration of the case for grant of two advance increments as per circular dated 21.9. 1974 issued by the State of Madhya Piadesh, after verihwtion of the facts pleaded in the petition. Counsel for’the State submits that case of the petin‘oner would V alsobe cOnsidered on the same lines. l \ @ In View of above, the petition is disposcd of with a dimction to the respondent autholiues to decnie the clmm of the pcunmer for grant of two advance morements as per annular dated 21 9 1974 1ssued by the State of Madhya Pradesh after veMcatmn of the fiacts pleaded 1n the petmon w1thm a period of four months mm today It 1s made clear that th1s Court has not expressed any opnnon on metits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the same strictly in accordance with law. _ //rf g‘ 'akar Judge V 5d!— Pntmker