3 Rl.E ! l.f'''SJ' •Ey^l'''i IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR(C.G| Writ Petition NC)4-2-6/ /2005 PETITIONERS / -'^ -/ /As JK ^w/ / 1. Harish Chand Thakur, aged about 46 S/o Gurudev Thakur, Upper Divisional Teacher, Govt. Middle School, Badegori Block-Charama, Dist- Baster (C.G) ,,~."- ••* -••'t.y ••" , 2. Smt. Nirmla, Meshraa-i aged about 44 .r^7^/ ' ,^.-,,,^, ^sy .••'.^^" <:;•'<y ^' year, w/o Racnesh Kumar Meshram, Upper. Divisinal Teacher, Govt. Priniary School Janpath Chararaa, Block- Charama, Dist. Baster (C.G) ^ , 3. Smt. Laxmi Ravte, aged about 40 / ^-^^J iNP?<t. Years w/o ArjunRavte, Primary •<i. ^•^?1 School-Charbhatha, Block-Charama &•' Dist. Baster (C.G) ry VERSUS RESPONDENTS , .A^w^ .. i! 1. The State of Chhattisgarh, Though the Secretaiy Department of School Education, Mantralay, D.K.S. Building, Raipur (C.G) 2. The Commissioner, Adim Jhati (S.T.S.C) Department Raipur (C.G) 3 The Assistant Conunissioner, Adim Jhati (S.T.S.C) Department Kanker Dist Baster (C.G) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 226/227 OF THE CONTITUTION OF INDIA t/'. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SATISH K. AGNfHOTRI. J. WRIT PETITION N0.4261 OF 2005 Petitioners : Harish Chand Thakur and others versus Respondents : The State of Chhattisgarh and others Present : Mr. Rak^h Antheny, counsel for the petitionsrs. Mr. Arun Sao, Govemment Advocate for the State/ respondents. ORDER (Passed on 10'" of November, 2006) Leamed counset appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioner No.2 be permitted to withdraw her petitten with liberty to flle a fresh petition as she is claiming relief of grant of two advance incrsments not on the basis of B.Ed./B.T.I. Certificates but on the basis of D.Ed. Certificate. Leamed counsel for the petitioners Turther submits that the other petitioners are claiming ttie relief of grant of two advance increments on the basis of B.T.I. Certificate. 2. Accordingly, the writ petition, so fer as it relates to petitioner hto.2, stands dismissed aswittidravm with Uie above-stated tiberty. No order as to coste. 3. Petitioners No.1 and 3 are working as Teacher in Government Schools. In the course of their service as Teacher, Siey have obtained B.T.I. Certificate at their own expenses before 1-3-19W. ^35' •1\' 4. Accordlng to learned counsel for Ihe petitlonere, petitioners No.1 and 3 are entiUed to two advance increments in viewof the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bhafadwaj vs. Municipal CorporaSon, Duig andsnoffwr', whereln it has been held that the teachers, having obtained B.Ed., M.Ed., B.T.I. Certlficates, at their own expenses, are covered by thecireular dated 24-12-1998 issusd by the State Government of^4adhya Pradesh. 5. Further, in the matter <sf Smt. Manotwna Shrwasteva vs. Sfefe o/ M.P. and other^, the ^Aadhya Pradesh Administrafive Tribunal, Gwalior Bench, white considering Uie cireular dated 1-3-1999, wherein it is provided that the Assistant Teachers, who have acquired B.Ed. Degree at ttieir own cost between 23-10-1964 and 7^-1973 shalt be entitled to two advance increments, relied on decision in the case of Rakesh Kumar Shtivastava vs. Stete of M.P. arxt offiers passed in Original Applicatlon No.1632 of 1999. deeidedon 12-10-1999, wherein it is observed that the cireular dated 1-3-1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively. Thus, a Teacher, may be Assislant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. Degree beftire 1-3-1999 is entitled to two advance increments. 6. It is pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the then State of Madhya Pradesh had ffled a Special Leave Petition against the orders passed by the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissedSpecial Leave Petition No.1999 of 2000 filed against the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the effect that the circular dated 1-3-1999 rannot be msxte appllcable refrospecUvety, passed by the Tribunat, becomes final and the same ^ shall be applicable to all the Assistant Teaehers, who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. Certificatesbetore 1-3-1999. It is furthersiAstantiated by a ciroular dated 17-10-2003 issued by ttie present State of IWadhya Pradesh, wherein the cireular ctearlystates about the decision of ttie Hon'bteSupreme Court. 7. Leamed counsel for Bie pefitioners ft.irther submits that the facts and question of law involved in the presentc^e ef petitionere No.1 and 3 are squarely cm/ered by the decision of tttis Court in <he caseaf YastrwantKiimarWiaiadwal (Supm), to whteh tearned counsel appearing Tor ttie respondents/State feirly concedes and ^rees wth the avermente made by leamecl counsel appearing forthe petitioners. 8. Accordingly, ttie writ petjtion, so far as it relates to petitionere No.1 and3, isallowedjn terms of the deciston ofthisCourt In the matter of Yashwar^ Kumar Bharadvy (Supra), subjeet to verification of the fact as to whether petitioners No.1 and 3 have acquired B.T.I. Certificate at their own expensesas per the circulais datsd 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance incremente ornot. No order as to coste. 1 2I06 (II) MPJR-CGS6 2 2000 (1)M.P.L.S.R. t36