n iS ^^^•^^^^ fl P;^ntedbvShn.^~.^-^^_^ dat6d.....A>-^"--"": p :. BEI (lat6d.....&->-"-" C.ptO&i IN THE HICH COURT OF CHHATTISCARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) N0. ^^$> / /2006 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE PETITIONER CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, , Suman Kumar Kujur aged about 46 years, son of Shri Basil Kujur, Head Master - Government (Tribal) iviiddle School - Tamta, Tah. patthalgaon, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS </1. ^/2. ^//2' ^^w ^'^O-' ,3, ^- ^- VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, through Secretary, Department of Tribal welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Commissioner, Department of Tribal welfare, Raipur (C.G.) Assistant commissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare, District Jashpur Nagar (C.G.) Principal, Government (Tribal) Higher Secondary School ^tv^ Patthalgaon, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) The petitioner, named above, respectfully submits as under:- KE6H COURT OF CHHATT[S6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (s) No. 5481 of 2006 Petitioner : Baij Na'th Prosad Nand Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh & others Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W. P. (s) No. 5484 of 2006 Shyam Bandhu Patel Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others W. P. fs) No. 5485 of 2006 Bahadur Singh Sidar Versus State of Chhattis9arh & others W. P.fe)No. 5487 of 20)6 Devtal Kurre Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others W. P. fs) No. 5488 of 2006 Petitioner : A-tnw Ram Rao Versus Respondents ; State of Chhatt-isgarh & others Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Re^iondents W. P. fs) No. 5489 of 2006 Sunil Shrivastava Versus State of Ctihaftisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 5490 of 2006 Dadu Ram Patet Versus Stnte of Chhatfrisgarh & others And W. P. (s) No. 5491 of 2006 Petitioner : Suman Kumar Kujur Versus Respondents ; Stnte of Chhatt'isgarh &others c?-3 Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri A. N. Bhakta, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri Sumesh Bajaj, 6ovt. Advocate for +he respondents/State. OR&ER (10th October, 2006) 1. Leamed counsel oppearing for the petitioners submits that while working as Assistant Teachers/Upper t)ivision Teachers, the petitioners have gone on training to improve their qualifications on their own expenses and acquired B.Ed./B.TJ Examination Certificates. 2. The present writ petitions, being W.P.(s) Nos. 5481/2006, 5484/2006, 5485/2006, 5487/2006, 5488/2006, 5489/2006, 5490/2006 and 5491/2006 involve similar facts and common question of luw. Thus, '•these petitions are being disposed of by this common order. 3. According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advonce increments in view of the decision of this Court- in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 ffl) MPJR-C6 96}. This Court in the case of Yariiwomt Kumar Bharddwaj Vs. Municipat Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed./B.TJ. Examination ••£S.. c^ Certificate on his own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by the State Sovemment of AAadhya Prodesh. 4. Leamed counset for the petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law invoh/ed in the present cases are squarely covered by decision of ttiis Court' in the case. of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and s another (Supra), to which leamed counset appearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the overment made by leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners. 5. Accordingty, the wit petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the cose of Yoshwant Kumar Bharudwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to verification of •the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B. Ed./B.TJ. Examination Cert'ificates on their own expenses or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Bablu