./^F \^^, 1 BEFORE THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATTISGARH) W.P.(S)No.Ukl of 2010 PETITIONER Satish Kumar Sahu, S/o Late Shri ./' i&^/ C.L. Sahu, aged about 43 years, Upper Division Teacher, R/o Bhartiya v^ ,.<...^lr\^*- ^yy ^<y-- ^^?'--""" ^VL^\^--'~' Nagar, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur(C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1) State of Chhattisgarh ""... \f't ER.Ai;u»8 Through-The Secretary Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) 2) District Education Officer, Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OR MANDAIVLUS/DIRECTIQ^N QF QTHER_APPROPRIATE WRLT. _jCl^L___^D^»45f*'•In.nn ^aJk^n^-aA-At ^^i;s%^^'^(;^:%^t'" ATtiK ^^SiS&S^^i^^: ^^;.^::1^';^^:^ HIGH COURTOFCHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETiTiON (S) No. 1142of2010 PETITiONER RESPONDENTS : Satish Kumar Sahu. VERSUS : State of ChhatBsgarh & another. WRIT PETITiON UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF iNDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Safeh K. Aanihotri. J. Present Snri Somkant Verma, Advocate ibr the petitioner. Shri N.N.Roy, Panel LawyerfortheState/respondents. ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on 01- day of April, 2010) With the consent of leamed counsei for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 1. By this petition, the petitioner seete a direction to se respondents to pay two adyance increments on passing of B.Ed examination, on his own expenses, before entertng into servlce. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submiis ttiat the issue involved in the present case is no longer fss Iniegra as fhe same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Coun in Asha Saxena v. State ofM.P. & Ors. as well as by this Court in the matter of Yashv/ant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Munidpal CorpOfation, Dwg S anothe^ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The SiaiB Govt of 6. Learned counsei further submits thai ttie instant petition is squarety coveied by ths decision as aforesiated. Tnus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a represenfation to tfte respondent auBiorities to decide his case for grant of two increments in the iight or aforestated decision, subject to vertfication of the fact asto whether tfte petitioner has acquired B.Ed. certificate on his own expenses before entering into service. Learned counsel appearing fbr the State/respondents submlts ihat in the event, the petitioner makes a represenfation, t'ne same wili be considered and decided, in acconjance vrith !aw and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supia) as weii as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj and Gopesfi Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks rrom ifte daie of receipt of itse representation. In view of loiegomg, accordsng to ttie tearned counsei appearing for the psfitionere, nothlng survives in this petition for adjudication. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge '2009(II3)MPJR(SC)59 22C06(Il)MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005