BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) NQ^ /2010 / PETITIONER ^ 3r.^6a: ^•^^ v>v'',..;-^'vV.^ ^•yy »>:?• a:: ^y Y-- ^••' -^'-' / RESPONDENTS Smt. Falora Tirkey, aged about 45 years, wife of Shri Vinod Kumar Tirkey, D/o Shri Marshal Ekka, occupation - Asst. Teacher, Govt Middle School - Durgapur Colony, Tah. Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) ^ 2. The District Education Officer, Raigarh (Chhattisgarh) 3. The Block Education Officer, Education Block, - Dharamjaigarh, Distt. Raigarh (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, .+.-K l 1 1»T ni-l1-«»vit.+n—" " •• K ^t --1 /K. • HIGH CQURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRITPETmON^S) No. 634 of2010 PETmONER : Smt. Falora Tirkey. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgarh & Others. WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTICTsLOFJNDIA SB: Hon'Me Shri Satish K. Aeiuhotri^J. Present: Shri A-N.Bhakta, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G.A forfhe State/respondents. Q8ALORDER (Passed on 11th day of Fetiruary, 2010) With consent, leamed counsel for the parties were heard tmally. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments Irom the date ofpassing ofD.Ed examination, on his owa expenses, durine their service period. 2. Shri Bhakta, leamed eounsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra as tlie same has been considered and decided by this Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaf v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another^ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh and another^ . 3. Shri Bhakta fiirther submits that tiie instant petition is squarely covered by Ae decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification ofthe tact asto whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed certificate on his own expenses during the course ofhis service. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the li^rt offhe decision ofthis Court in Yashwant Kumar Bhxradwaj and GopeshKumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of fhe representation. 5. In view of foregoing, according to the leamed counsel appearmg for tlie petitioners, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge