(^ ^ ^TT^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. W ^ OF 2010 PETITIONERS >0 ....^ / ^y ^y ^y^ ^".^' -..'•" ^' .A.''' 1. Lal Singh Maravi S/o Shri Pahru ram Maravi, Aged about 36 years, at present posted as Head Master, at Primary School Khaprakhol, Tahsil Kota, District Bilaspur, C.G. 2. Vinod Kumar Maravi S/o Shri Heera Singh Maravi, Aged about 41 years, at present posted as Upper Division Teacher, at Middle School Tada, Block Takhatpur, District Bilaspur, C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh. Through: The Secretary School Education Department, Secretariat, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, C.G. District Education Officer, Bilaspur , District Bilaspur C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OFINDIA HIQH ©QURTOF CHHATrtSQARHAT BILASPUR PETinONER RESPONDENTS WRITPETmONfS) No. 1096<rf201Q Lal Singh Rterayi & anotfter. VERSUS State of Chhatttsgarh & another. WR1T PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2^ 01- THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'bte Shrt SaUsh K. AanKi^LA Present Shri Rakesh Pandey, Advocate for the petlttoner. Shri A.V.Shridhar Paneliawyefforthe Stete^<wponcterrt&. ORM.ORDER (Passed on 15th day of March, 2010) With the conserrt of leamed counsel tor the partl< , the matter ts heecd flnally. 1. By this petrtion, the petttioners seek a dlrectton to ttie respondente to pay two advance incremente from the date of passing of D.Ed e)caniinaton, cn ttieirQmii expenses, during their service period. 2. Shri Pandey, learned counsel appearing for the pettttoneis submlte that the issi^ invotved in the present <^ise Is no tonger ^ss? Aa&^®as th©same has been considered and deddted by the Supfeme Court in AsfmSaxena K Stoteof M.P, & Ors.1 as well as by this Court in the maffler of Ya^iwant i^Mfiar BhaFadwa] v. MufvldpQl CoFporaffwt, Duig & afwttt^ anct Gope^ Kwwr Verma v. The Stete Govt. cf Chhattlsgaih wd anathet. 3. Shri Shrivastava further submits that the instent petitlon is squarNy Govered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitionenB may be permttted to make a representation to the respondent authorities to dedde tiwir cases for grant of two increments in the tight of aforesteted deciston, subject to veriBcatton of the fact asto wrtiether the petitfoners have acquired D.Ed certjflcate cm ttieir own expenses during the course of their seivice. 4. L^m^l counsel appearing for ttie Statie/re^aoiKtente subroite ttiatin the ewnt, the pedtionere mates a represerdation, fhe sanie will be con^klered and deckted.in accoidancewtth lawand Inttiel^tatof ttie decisionsofthe Supranre Court in Asha Saxena (supia) as wefl ^ this Court in Yasfmant Kumar Bhasadwaj w\d Gopesh Kumar Verma ^p^, wthin a (^riod of four weeks fromthedateofreceiptoftherepresentation. 5. In vtew of tor^olng, accordir^ to the tearned CCMIIW^ api^arlng fbr the petitioners, nothing survives in this petitiQn foradjudicatjon. 6. Accordingly, the wnt p^ition is dlspos^i of. s<v- . . SarishK.Agnihot" 12009(m)MPJR(SC)59 22006(U)MPJR-CG96 3WP(&)No.4130of2005