•^jy' C RCt'f*-?. ^i2~iUS-i- .^h.^*^. efz^T^. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0..-^^..27./2007 PETITIONERS ^y' ^ Sunder Lal Patel S/o shri Sujan Lal Patel, aged about 41 years, Assistant Teacher posted at Govt. Middle School Kiritmal, Block Kharsiya, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) Chandrika Singh Patel S/o shri Uasat Rani Patel, aged about 48 years, Assistant Teacher posted at Govt. primary School Nawapara (East) Bhupdevpur Block Kharsiya, Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS r*; <-»-^-"-' -^ . 1 Q ~^>^ (..°•'' G^ /2. ^3. State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, RaipLir (C.G.) Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Head OfEce Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) District Codrdinator, Tribal WeUare Department Head Office Raigarh Dist. Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/3Sff OF THE COUNSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCJ; OF WRIT IN NATURE OF CEERTIORARI, MANDAMUS. PROHIBITION AND OTHER SUITABLE WRIT OR WRITS, DIRECTION OR DIRECTIONS. ORDER OR ORDERES: XI-HC-78 ^ _ ( 2-^ 3^'^TFTT^3, 8iTny'16, Rldiy; ^*f-^^. 2^2/o^ TTT(T?TTgWTq7 ""••••"•"•"•'""^" 200 3f1^TqiT^ii<) traT3n^rstiH ./" Gopal ^ 3<l^i Maih (ifll^'5"^) ^<nw:(if?ff3ii^T 19-1-2007 Maheshwari, Mr. R.S.Patel, Mr. Ravll Mr. Rajendra Tripsrthi, Mr. Sushil Dubey, Gupta, Deputy Govemmen|t Advocate for the State/respondents. Maheshwari, Mr. Rahu) Jha and cour^set for th®prtitioner(s). 'emrtent Advocate andMr. Safeh Sovemihent Advocate andMr. lih counsel appearhig for the parties, the lof. Writ Petition (S.) No.262 of 2007 in With the consent of toametl matter is heard flnally and dtspos^l < Common order dictated ii|i open Court, passed separately. A copy of this order be pla|ced on ttie record of ttie connacted writ petltions. *i*ilci<fl-i *ii><ciTffteiit<Ri^<;i< ^srf^Tran^T Sd/- SatishK.Agnihotri Judge P.T.O. k HISH COURT OF CHHATriSGARH AT BU-^SPUR SINGLEBENCH : HON'HLE MR. ^TISH K. AGNIHOTRI. J. Petitioners WRIT PETITION (S.t N0^82 OF 2007 Sundw LalPatel and anottier versus Respondents : State <rf Chhattl^arh and ottiers PeUtioner WRIT PETmON (S.) N0.263 OF 2B87 Puna Ram Sahu versus Respondents : State Govfc of CWtatttegaihandoUiers PeSBoner WRff PETITION (S.l N0.264 OF 2007 Ranr Kunar Satame vereus Resoondents : State Oovt. ofGhhatfegarti andothas WRIT PETmON (S.i NO^eSOF 28W Petitioner : Hemant KumarSalam» Versus Respondents : StateQovt.ofChhattl^arftandoUiers PetJtioner wrar PETITIQIN (s.i NO^BS opzooy Budhnath Sa! Paikra versus Reseondents : Starte of ChhErtfegarttand ottiera wrar pETmoN <s.i NO^S? OF 2007 <L PetiUoner : Madan Lal Sahu -/- versus Respondents : StateofChhaUtegaittandothere Petifoner WRIT PETITION (S.1 N0^89 OF 2«>7 PHamberPatel versus Resoondents : aatetrfChhattisgaitiandrthers Petitioner WRIT PETmON(S.)NO^yOQF 2007 Trinsrth Gtraud»ary versus Respondents : StBtetrfGhhattisgsBhanAothers r Priitioner WRITPETITION (S.t IW.281 OF 2W7 Snrt. DeepU ^irawal veraus ResDondents : StateorChliatBsgarhMidothere Present : Mr. R.S-Patd, Mr. Ravl Maheshwari, h4r. Rahul Jha and Mr. Rajendra Tripathl, counsel for the petitioner(9). Mr. Sushil Dubey, Government A^ocate and Mr. Satish Gupta, Deputy Govemment Advocate forthe State/respondents. ORDER (Passed on 19th Day of January, 2007) Leamed counsel appearing for »iepariias joinBy suhmit thatthe facts and quesfion <rf law involved in the prssent b^h of writ petiUons are squarely covered by the decision ofthisCourtinthe casa of Yashwant Kumar Bhsrwhwrf vs. 1unfc<M( Cnfporattofl, Dy»ar toHi anoithei'. 2. In subsequent cases, is., Writ PetiUan (S.) hto.4130of 2005 (Sopesft KumarVwma v8. The State Sovt of efcftafffagw* aml anottiw) and other connected matters, ctecided by this Court en 15-12-2006, pursuant to tha meino dated SB-1-1995, issued by the Secretaty, Board of Secondary Educafion, Bhopal andlfte prospeclus aS DiplCTna in Education Examlnatian, it was clarified that ttie nomenclatureof the Basic Training InsUtute, i.e., B.T.I. has been 1 4 changpd and renamal as Diptcwna in Educallon, l.e., Dfd. Accordingty, the D.Ed. eertificate hoktBis are atse coverect by ttr decision in Writ Petitfon (S.) lsto.4130 of 2tX®(Goipesft KumarVwma vs. The Sfefe GoW. ofChhattsgwh aocfanoftei) (Supra). 3. For the aforementioned reasons, the writ petitians are disposed of in terms <rf ttie declsion of this Court f»the matter <rf Yashwait KiimarBhaiwfwa^ (Supra), subject to verification of Ure firet as to whether the peBtioners have acqulred B.EdJB.T.t./D.Ed. CerBficates at Iheirown expenses as per ths ciroularsdatad 24-12- 1998 and 1-3-1999 and further vi*iether they hava been p»ld tffo adwsawe increments or not. No ordw as to costs. Oopal 4. A copy of this order be ptaced en ttie record of the connected writpetiUons. _^_———--— — Sd/- SarishK. Agnihotn Judge 1 2006(11)MPJR-GS96 1