Atf«?l BBP0RB TMB i3^*BI«E HIGH CGlRT OF <? ECAWRB.JtT BIUSPUR (C*G»J W8P*» . . ,^°^2-^/2003, Peti'feioBer / -^f/ ^s:>' ..^" N 'y Shriaati Aarfel. Shrl.vasiava W/o Shri ebandm Shetehar Shrivas'fcava> Aged 40 years, Offioial Address2 S'ilak PyiinarySchool, No« g, Burg> teachers Colouy, I3urg» Resld@ace - Kayastbpat!a» Ifeird No» 05, ISBRS (c.a.N gw Sriisati Pusl^aSata 'fetmrakar W/o Shrl Kiaimaaal, Aged 63. yearst ©ificllalAddress « tl3ak Primitry Sehool N@t 2» Surgi Resl.dcsice - TeaGfaerts Celony, Surg. ^Braus* Respondetts 1» State ©weitimea'bo£ Chha'&tlsgarh tbyough—s@cretary> Seho©iEdGcatioa ©eparfcmen"fc»Secre'feartate Bhawan (©ld) N|K,(Hbgi)ital,Balpur(c.Q.N 2. Bistrict Sehool ©fficer, @U2<g (C.@,)^- ^;^"' Wri-fe petition ua^er Artev 226/227 0t the GonstI.tutioB ef Bidia. XI-HC-22 /sn^T^T Rt'ii^ CT^T 't si!»*ii<s»i^Ra -1 !ii ; • iiiiiiti^ ^o?';s?rai^R, ^Ti1^<j<o, fa<vii«^< 31T^?T x^^ ,^...W.f;...Ao&fc.L^ WHCW ^hHlcft 200 ^f^f' ^n^r'5'^n^T ^?ft<T 23-7-2003 Shri N,L. ShrivastdVQ/ couns^ Shrl S.K. Agrawa!/ Deputy| respondents. The main grievance of the B. Ed. coursc and ther^fore jn terms of the ©overri 24th Deeember 1998 and a notiee tl 2003, then they have not gran"| I perused the petitjon. It has not me?feitionedl B. Ed. cxamJnation the petitioners prayer that they have B. cntltjed for two cdditiona! incremerts. After passing the B. Ed. ciddltjonol increments the proper col first they should have m4 additionaj qudjfjcatjon Into thelr s^ through proper char^iei gi^anting theni two addjtional increif^ No. F 7-44/96/20-4, dated 24-t2-9| From the perusai of the pe^ not this course and dl 4 <»ii^{<n<iltiTn^I?if "^ fe^ <fat$i< ^3?NTT^I^? I for the petitioners. 1 Advocate ©enerai for the Stote / t^etitioners in thls petition is that they they are entltied for twc^ additiona! 1-nent order No. F 7-44/96/20-4, doted ^ th@ r^spondent^ wa^ ^ent on 30 AAay ted two additionQ! increments. |1n thc petItEon that after passing the |iad ever moved the respondents with a S. examirsation Qnd, therefore, thcy arc N- ; ;. •' • ; ^xamjnation and In order to get two ^rse the petitloners was thot in thc ^ved their office for entering ifl^ fhis rvice record and thercofter they shouid ;i to the concerned Gulfiorities for in of the fiovernnient order 6.''- • . .. ' . •" Jtion it seems thot^the pctitioners had A^v(- f a they I$9^ notice 1^) the XI-HC-22 3:{T^T'^T (^nicft ^^ 9(i)*tiw ^ii^a v ^ .h fca'^></ -3"51 '??TraT?R, ^tll^<l^, fami^^< ^rif^T ^r^ HINCTI w^i^**"""' '* ' ' ^T^ 200 •IN^T' 3TI^T ^^aNR ^%<i raspond^nts on 30th May 2003 for ^i thereaftar ru^hed to this Court and fi In my consjdered oplniori, quoljfjcation Is entered in thelr concerned authorities through prop4 increments and ^ithout glving any o^portuhity to the respondents, it wouid not be Ju^t and proper to any or At this stage, the learned co|jnsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners niay be glven tlme to r^ representations are not consldercd ^ be entitled to approach this Cour1| petition. The proyer niade by the learn^ "eosonobfe, therefore, the petltion^i ^overnment for grant of two adc ^ovemment order No. F 7-44/96! procedurc indlcated above, If the and after cor^lderlng the they wiii be at liberty to approach thi^ With these observatjons, this Partles are entitied for certifi <sht1Mi<y(^1-t HIN<rff ^ f^^ <(^I^K '^^fN^^T^f rant of two fidditlonai inerem^n+^ and iied thepetition on 15Tn July 2003. uniess the petitloners' Qdditiona! lervlce record and they moved the ;r channe! for grant of two Qdditionai ler against the respondents. lovc the State ©overnmentand if their flthln a reasonable time/ the^ they wii! \, . ' Qgajn for the reilef sought \in this |d counsel for tiie petitioner isjust and jrs are at liberty to move the State litional increments in terms of the ^20-4, doted 24-12-98 03 per the requests of the .petitioners are not within G reasonabie period/ then ^ Court. |etitjon is disposed of. ^d cbpy of this order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge l^T^^Rlt ^