au<u!L.a» ;^?^a)t •GSS'S- c . ? < lc30i (2) IN THE HSGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0.'^S-t- /2006 PETITIONER ^ RESPONDENTS -/1. t.'^? ^Ji Ku. Anjana Das D/o Shri Nagendra Das Age about 40 years, Upper DivisionTeacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. School, Dharampura, Distt. - Jagadalpur (C.G.) VERSUS State Govt. of Chhattisgarh Through: Secretary, School Education DepartmentMinistry, D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) &^ u "• ^VYSB' ^ 2. District Education Officer Jagadalpur(C.G.) ir~ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227'OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitioner most humbly submit as under:- r' ^ HI6H COURT OF WHATTISeAW AX BILASPUR W. P. {5) No. 6986 of 2006 Petitioner : Pranab Btmerjee Versus Respondents: 5'hate 6ovt. of Chhattisgarh & others And W.P.(5)No.6987of2006 Petitioner : Ku. Anjana Das Versus Respondents: State 5ovt. of Chhattisgorh &another Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Present: 5hri Ajay Siriyastova, f4dvocate for the Petitioner(s). Smt. Anju Ahuja, Deput/ ©overnmentAdvocoite for the Stcrt'e/respondentfi. OR^D^R (Passed on 15th day of December, 2006) ^- 1. The petitioners are working as Lecturers/Upper Division Teachers in the government schools. In the course of their services as Lecturers/Upper Division Teachers, •the petitioners have obtained B.Ed. examination certificates on their own expenses before 1.3.1999. 2. Writ Petition (5) No.s 6986/2006 and 6%7/2006 are being disposed of by this common order os the facts and question of law involved in these petitions are common. 3. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advonce increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwai Vs. Munrcipal CorDoration.-DurQ and another {2006 (It) MPJR-C6 96}. TTiis Court in the case of Yoshwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municjpal Corporation, Durg and ano-ther (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed./B.T.I. Examination Certificate on their own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 (Annexure P/7) issued by the Sta'te ©overnmentof Madhya Prffldesh. Further in the matter of 5mt. Mmprama Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and others { 20CX) (1) M.P.L.5.R. 136 } the Madhya Pradesh Sta-te Administrative Tribunal, fiwalior Bench, while considering the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherein, it is provided that the Assistont Teachers, who have acquired B. Ed. degree at their own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shall be entitled to two adyance increments, relied on decision in the case of Rdkerii Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. <& others passed in O.A. No. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999 wherein it isobserved that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made cpplicable retrospectively. Thus, a teacher, moy be Assistant Teacher, who hds ob+ained B. Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advance increments. It is pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners •that the then State of Madhya Pradesh had 'filed a Specinl Leave Petition against the orders passed by the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Supreme Courl- dismissed Specwl Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 filed against the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to "riie effect that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made opplicaible retrospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becomes final and the same diall be applicable to all the Assistant Teachers who have obtained B. Ed./B.T.I. examination certificate before 1.3.1999. It is further substantiated by a circutar dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State of Madhya Pradesh wherein the circular clearly states about the decision of the Supreme Court. 6. Learned counset for the petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law involved in the present ccise are squarely covered by decision of this Court in +he case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporortion, t)urg and another (Supra), to which learned counsel appearing for +he respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 7. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharodwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed./B.T.I. Examination Certificate on their own expen»sas per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. 8. A copy of +his order be placed on record in connected motters. a' Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge Subhassh