Q9 HE$H CGURT 6F CHiiATTlSGARfi AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIQN {S2 No. T73 @2333 Sm‘t. Ahilya Devi Ya£iav, W/o. Shri Rz-lmdqaran Yada'v, Agéd about 46 ye-ayrz, i’mi « Agsiswm Teacher: Government Primary $ch093, Lingywih, Puratii Basfi, Biiwp‘ur, Blwk — Bilha: District ~- Biiaspur (CG) VERSUS RESPONDENT$ : 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through: Secretary Department of Educatiim, Mantralaya, EKS. Bhawang Raipur: (C.G.) 2. District Eéucaiion Officar, Biiaspur, Diarict Bilaspur (CA1) Biock Educaiion Officer, Blwk Biiha, DiSirici; Bilaspur (CG) PETITEONER 5)4 WRIT ?ET1TION U/A. 226/227 OF THE CONSTITLWION OF INDIA MW SB: Iion’hie Shri Satish K. Aunih’atri. J. Regent: Shn‘ Kunai Das, Advocate for the Jeetitioner. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondentg. ORAL ORDER (Passed onW 10 day e‘f January, .2008) Learned couase] appearing fer the petitioner as. well as for the State/respogdems jeiutly submit that the faet and question of law invetved m the present writ petition are the Same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bharaxtwaj Vs. Municipal Coryoratien, burg and another {2006 (H) MRIR-CG 96; whieh has been aisposed ofvide order dated 03.04.2006, 2. Accordingly, the wet petition is allewmi iii tenns of the order paseed in the case of Yashwant Kmar Bharadwaj Vs. Mum‘cipai Cerporatien, I)urg and another (Supra), sttbject to verifacatien of the fact as to whether the petitiener has acquired BTJ. Examixxation Cettiticate en her own expensee as per the circuiare dated 2412,1998 and 01 031999 and fmther whethe she has been paid twa advance increments or not. Ne order a3 to costs" Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge r