IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (c.G.) WP. (S)Noé(9 .......... 2011 Petitioner. Lokeshwar Prasad Soni S/o Shri Khedu Prasad Soni, aged 46 yéars, Upper Division Teacher, Village Arjunda, Block Gunderdehi, Distt. Durg C.G. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : / State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Education Department D.K.S Bhawan Raipur (C.G.) / 2. District Education Officer Durg (C.G) WRIT PETITON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA @ HIGH COURT OF CHHA'ITISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 619 of 201 1 PETITIONER : Lokeshwar Prasad Soni. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Another. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon’hle Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Y.S.Thalmr, Deputy Advocate General for'the State/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 02“ day of February, 2011) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of two advance increments on account ofthe fact that the petitioner has passed D.Ed. examination during the course of service, at his own cost It is submitted that the issue involved in the present petition is no longer res integra and the same has been finally settled by the Supreme Court inAsha Saxena v. State ofM.P. 0": Ors} as well as by this Court in the matter of Yash want Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another? and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. QfChhatn‘sgarh and another? . It is further submitted that this Court has also taken a similar view in its order dated 6—2-2009 passed in W.P. (S) No.6257 of 200$. Learned counsel further submits that the order dated 29-4-2010 1 2009 (HI) MPJR (SC) 59 2 2005 (11) MPJR CG 96 3 WP (S) No.4i3o ofzoos i V 2 passed in W.ANO. 124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the judgnent ofthe Supreme Court inAsha Saxena (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another W.A.No.’87/2009, directions have been issued for consideration of the case for grant of two advance increments as per the circular dated 21-9-1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verification of the facts pleaded in the petition. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that the case of the petitioner would also be considered on the same s lines. In view ofthe above, the petition is disposed ofwith a direction to the respondent authorities to decide the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments in accordance with the orders passed in the above-referred cases, after verification of the facts, pleaded in the petition, within a period of 8 weeks horn today. Sd/—' Satish K. Agnihotri Judge