5mm mum BEFORE THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W.P (S) No. ééaa: 0f2011 PETITIONER S/rnt. Hemlata Yadav, aged about 50 ’ I years, Headmaster, W/o Govemment Shri Sohanlal Government Yadav, 3 51 Primary School, Thakurbandha, Block- Chhuriya, District-Rajnandgaon (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS :1./ State of Chhattisgarh, Through : the , Secretary, Education, D.K.S. Department Bhawan, of' School Raipur , ()(i wé\?f\3€\\\q/o whgv} ‘v /\.--‘h‘/} ...... . u 1\ 2./District Rajnandgaon, (C.G.) Education District Rajnandgaon Officer, ..........gwy..... /, (C.G.) v . 9w$° ww‘ ‘i‘WM’ y 3. Chhuriya, Block Education District Rajnandgaon oméer, (0.6.) Block- g WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER w.p.(sy.no. 6697/201 1 Shri Vijay Sahu, counsel for the petitioner. Shri A.V.Shn'dhar, P.L. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORDER {16.11.2011} The petitioner, who was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher under the School Education Depanment on 13.12.88 is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not adding two advance inCIements in her salary even though she did her B.Ed. from Ravi Shankar University, Raipur at her own cost in the year 1986. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for two advance increments as she had obtained B.Ed Examination certificate, in accordance with the provisions of Circular dated 34.12.98 and in view of the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of State ofM.P. & Another Vs. Baddnarayan Acharya and others reported in 1996 SC 2779 and Yashwant Kamar Bhardwq Vs. Municipal Carpal alion, Durg and another reported in 2006 (H) MPJR 96 (CG). On the other hand, counsel for the State submits that erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh vide circular dated 22.10.1964 allowed advance increments only to those govemment servants who proceeded for training up to 22. 10. 1964 whether at his own cost or at the government cost. However, who proceeded on training on or after 23.10.1964 can get two annual increments only if the twining is at his cost and not at the cost of the Government. This circular of dated 23.10.1964 was superceded vide order dated 10.12.1975. The Government vide notincation dated 16.6.1973 amended M.P. Non- PETITIONER Smt. Hamlata Yadav versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh &. Others Gazette Class-II Educational Services (Non—college Services) Recruiunent and Promou'on Rules, 1993 added qualificat'on of B.’I‘.I. or B.Ed degree for appoinhznent on the post of Assistant Teacher. The petitioner would be entitled for advance increments only in. the condition that he had obtained his B.T.I/B.Ed./B.T.I. degree at his own cost during service after obtaining permission form the department between 23.10.1964 to 1.3.99. To clan‘fy the above position, circulars have already been issued on 6.2.2007 and o 30.1.09. Factsé as detailed above, are not in dispute. This Court in the matter of YashWant Kumar Bhamdwaj (supra) elaborately discussing the circulars dated 24.12.98, 1.3.99 and relying upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Badrinarayan Achaiya’s case (supra) has held that teachers, not assistant teachers alone, would be entitled to two advance increments on obtaining B.Ed examination certincate after 22.10.1964, as the circular dated 22.10.1964 does not prescribe any outer limit of the period of obt B.Ed, M.Ed & B.T.I. cerh‘ncate. It has been further held that circular dated 1.8.99 is applicable to only Assistant Teachers (LDT) and not to other teachers (UDT). State counsel fairly submits that principle of law laid down in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj’s case (supra} has attained nnality and case of the petitioner in this petition is also squarely covered by the ' above judgment as also circular dated 24. 12. 1998. For the aforesaid reasons, the petitioner is entitled to the payment of two advance increments from the date of declaration of the petitioner’s B.Ed. examination result. The respondents are accordingly directed to make payment of two advance increments to the petitioner from the date of his passing B.Ed.. examination, within a period of four months from today. However, this order shall be subject to all verifications made by the State regarding facts pleaded In... , in the petition. 1‘ W Sd/- i ‘i Pritinker Diwaker l Judge No order as to costs. n aining