S.B. iService Matter) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR ^ 1 (CHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION (S} N0. \ SLO\ /2010. PEnTIONER: Rajkumar Arya, son ofLate Shri Heeralal Aiya, aged about 42 years, working as Lecturer at Govt. Higher Secondary School Kaudikasa, District Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. versus ^S''t Respondents d<>".» A'?.'"^ ^!" '^•' .-^' ..A"' 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, TribalWelfare \'0..-''''n-C) A'}0"^^ ... Department, D.K-S.Bhawan, \>^ev^y^ Raipw, Chhattisgarh. il^\^'- /2. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Wetfare Department, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ^4. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Rajnandgaon, District Rajnandgaon, C.O. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2260^- THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ,/ ':^ ^' N HIGH COURT OF CHHATrtSGARH AT BtLASPUR WRfT PETmON (S) No. 1201 of 2010 v PETITIONER RESPONDENTS : RajkumarArya. VERSUS : StateofChhaWsgath&Otheis. Writ Petitun Under Artide 226 Ot The ConsUtuflon W Indla SB: Hon'bfe Shri SaUsh K. AgnUKrtii. J. Present .\nat Shri KS.Pawar, Adwcate tor the petittoner, Shri A.V.Shridhar, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondents. OR/U-ORDER (Passedon22nd dayof March,20TO) With the consent of teamed counsel for the parttes, the matter Is heaid finally. 1. By this petition, the petittoner seelcs a direcUon to the respondents to pay two advance increments ui pasang of B.Ed. oaminatkm, on h!s ONW) expenses, before entering Into senrice. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the pdltioner submlls that the Issue involved in the present case Is no longer res Integra^s the same has been CCTiskfered and decided by the Supreme Court in <4ato Sseena v. State ofM.P. & Ois.'as well as by thts Court in ttie matter of YashwaM Kumar Bhaiaehi^ v. Mmldpal CoipoiaticHi, Duig & awoite/?and Gope^iKumar Vwma v. The Ststa Govt of CMsWsgaih andanothe?. 3. Shri Pawar further submits that the instant pedUon Is squarely cowred by the decision as atoreslated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitte! to make a representaUon to the respondent authorit'es to decide hls case for gant of two increments in the light of aforestated dedsion, subjectto veifflcaUon of the fact asto whether the petifoner has acquired B.Ed. certificate on his own wpenses before entering into servlce. 4. Leamed counsel appeari^g fbr the Staterfrespondents submite Biat in ttie event, the pefitioner makes a representation, ttie same will be considerBd arat decided, in accontence with law and in the light of the decistons of the Supreme Court In Asha Saxena (supia) as well as thls Court in Yastmant Ktiimr Btiaiadw^'s/twl Gcpesh Kumar Verma (siyia), within a period of lour vweks from the date of recelptof the representation. 5. In vlew of foregoing, accoidii^ to the leamed roureet appearing tor the petitloner, nothing sunrives In this peUion for adjudlcatton. 6. Accordli^ly.thewritp^itionlsdisposedttf. ,- w^ow ^^v iii'HHj^sgiBBa '2009(HI)MPJE.(SC)59 22006-gi)MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005