§§ HXGH COURT GF CHHATTI$GARH, BILA§P3R Petitianers “H345; Ego. 4352,2907 Nohl'u Ram Janghel, aged 37 years: 5/0 Shri Gwoverdhan Ram, AssiStant Teacher, Primary School, Takapas Kala, Dismct-Rajnajlégaon(CG) 2. Raghn Nam Prasad Sinha, aged 37 years S/o Shrj Babu Lal Sinha, Assistant Teacher, Primew School, Dilippur District Rajnandgaon(CG) 3. Udai Ram Vanna, aged 48 years s10 Shri Roop Sin"h Vanna, A33ista31t ’l‘eac'kwr, Primerv v School, Chant§gadhL Disfjict Rajnandgaon (CG) 4. Madhao Ram Kanwar, agecl 43 years, s/o Shn' Madaja Lal, Assistant Teacher, Primerv School, Achanakpnr, District Rajnandgaon {CG} 5. Durga Singh Thakm" aged. 52 years s/o Shn' Derha Ram, Assistant Teacher, Primery School, Baiga Tola, District Rajnandgaon(CG) 6. Bhagirathi Verma, aged 42 years, Sfo Shir Chaim Ram Verma, Assistant Teacher, Primary School, Karam Tara, District, Rajnamigaon (CG) 7. Domodar Prasad Chhatri, aged 4O years, sfo Shri Buddhu Ram Assistant Teacher. Pn'merv School, Shergarh, District RajnaiidgaomCG} Verses The State Government of Chhatfisgarh, through the Secretarv, Education 8r, Tn'bal Denar’hneht, DKS Bhavam, RaiDurKZG’! £0 RESPGE3EETS The District Education Officer, RajnarldgaomCG) WRIT PETE’E‘IGN UNDER ARTICLE 2.26 GF THE t CGHSTITUTEGN 6F INDIA. (gé 2 ‘ wags) Hef47$212007 Aggearance: Shn' Yashwant Singh, Govamment Advncate for thf, Stata on adva11c¢ copy. S1111 Ajay Shrivastava, counsel fm‘ the petitionars. GRAL GRDER (20.3.2007) Sunil Kumar Sinha, J. Heard on ad mission. Lcarncd counsal fm‘ the pa‘iifjonem Shbmits fhat tha petitioners have passed B.Ed. f:xan1ina‘rion on their own exponses, therefore, thoy are entitled to receive two adVanoe incraments according to circmars dated 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999. He a}so mlb‘mits that in many identical mattors, the pafjfions have heen allowed in torms of tho order passed in the oaso of Yashwant ‘Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municinai Corporation, hum and wather {2005 (m M’JRCG 96E. He submits that the cage of the patitionom is; Squamly‘ covered by ihe saif} judgmeot. This haga] position i's not dispufaov hy learned counsel for the State. However, he Subinitsihai the order may he paseed in terms of the said judgment, hut it shall be subjected to Veiification regarding petitioners’ such qualification. Accord ingly, this writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in ease of Vashwant Kumar Riim‘adwaj Vs. Mimicipal Coiporaiimg Burg and a,mther(suyra) subject to verification of the facts as to whether the petitioners had acquired B.Ed. Examination. Certificate on their own expenses as per eirenlars dated 24. 12.1998 and 01.03.1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. The petition stands finally disposed of. No order as to costs. l sunita ‘ Sdl- 1 Sunil Kumar Sinha i Judge ,J‘