c^ IbLTHE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETETION (5) N0.6'?.L2^./2010 PETETIONER RESPONDENTS .^•4)"^ '}0-A^' ??".<» ^- y ^ ^•$f?$y 1. r^ 2. f 3. 4.- Lilamani Choudhari, Son of Rameshwar Prasad Choudhari, aged about 42 years, (U.D.T.), R/o. Village Uchbhitthi, Post Kirodimal Nagar, District Raigarh, working in Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kirodimal Nagar, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.6.), VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Education Depart- ment, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.6.), District Educatin Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.), Block Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.6.), Principal, 6ovt.Hr. Secondary School, Kirodimal Nagar, Raigarh, &istrict Raigarh (C.6.), WRIT PETETION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE COUNSTTTUTEON OF INDIA W^ivn ^W<f> ysr '*twwii, ©til'M'Ko,f®idi'yy,< ..U.:.P.-.....C.-5.1.^:...^L2-ltf 3T^?I 'ct^T ('^3'^) sn^i w R-<i<t] ^fl 3Tf^T sFTfN? :l- /^ t^nw^Tf^i sn^i 21.10.3010 Shri R.S.Patel.coUDsel for Siat. Smita Ghai, P.L. for fh.i Counsel for the petitioner entifled to benefit of two advauce having passed D.Ed. exaiuuiatiofl own cost. It is subinitted that fhel petition is no longer res integra a] decided by ftie HonTsle Suprem.^ Saxena Vs. State of M.P. 8s 0»s. tl|ie petitioner. State. KlbiDits ttiat tlie petitioner is liacremeiits on account of he after his appoiiitinent at his issue uivolved in. the present nd the sam.e has been finaQy Court in. fhe case of Asha 59. It is further submitted thal sinular view ia its order dated 6.1 6257/2008. Counsel for fhe petitloner order dated 29..4.2010 passed i4 wherein rehTiig upon the jiidgmeE|t case ofAsha Saxena (supra) aad m anofher Writ Appeal No. 87| issued for consideration of the m.crenients as per circular dated of Madhya Pradesh, after verificatf petitioa. Counsel for the State subnti would also be consideied on ttie s| cfi f<vl4lTT ^w<^\ ^ fs^ '^f^!< ^i'sifman^r ttus Court has also taken a [2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. fiirther subiuits fhat fhe Writ Appeal N0. 124/2009, of the Supreme Court ia the |he order passed by this Court 2009. directions have been for grant of two advance '1.9.1974 issued bv the State lon of tfae fects pleaded in fhe c&se lits that case of the petitioner amie luies. T ZD XI-HC—78 W*T?IT th'Hlcb ^ST "41<41<rlA!, ytll'M'iKo, fi|<vll'My,< ^.........^2:.^).^..:.^^^ 200 Sn^T 'WK (i^f^^tT) sn^i ^T K(-)1<t tT^TT 3TT^?T^Tffofr W3IW flfel 311^1 +i<if<y!''il-i Twraf'? fsvt ^fSre^re ^i'aifinaii^T In view of above, fhe direction to the respondent aufhorl petitioner for grant of two advaad dated 21.9.1974 issued bv fhe S1 verification of fhe facts uleaded in eight weeks froin today. pet^tion is disposed of wifh a Ities to decide the claim of the ^e iacreinents as per circular tate of Madhva Pradesh after |the petition withia a period of Sd/- Pridnker Diwakar Judge