'— ...<;""L-^. \^!"V:.^y^' .'.•;;"/';'"\§^;2""....-- ...--••^M.^:\[^"'" -2^^^ as"' ...-••" ^^ '^•" c , 'r . \o<5 LN THEJHGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITj'ETITION (Sl No/^/2009 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Raj Kumar Patel S/o Ishwari Lal Patel aged about 43 years, Head Master Govt. Primary School, Dera (Govindpur) Block- Dabhara, District Janjgir- Cham.pa (C.G.) VERSUS ^ 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^2. The District Education Officer, Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) ,3. The Block Education Officer, Block- Dabhara, District Janjgir- Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ART!CLB^26^QF_THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petitionei^jiijQslj3uiiiUu—arua---»uuaa^-A^^ mOH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION fS) No. 6603 of2009 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS Raj Kumar Patel. VERSUS State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenihotri, J. Present: Shri Anil Mourya, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy Govemment Advocate for the State. ORDER RAU (Passed on 11th day of November, 2009) Heard leamed counsel for the parties. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of D.Ed examination, on his own expenses, during his service period. 2. Shri Mourya, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh and another . 3. Shri Mourya further submits that fhe instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification ofthe fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed certificate on his own expenses during the course ofhis service. 4. Leamed counsel appearmg for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner make a representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decision of this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date ofreceipt ofthe representation. 5. In view offoregoing, according to the leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 6. Accordingly, thewrit petition is disposed of. _---" Sdi- '201 2W ,.^01' S^stt^d^ iWO^