IN THE HIGH COURT OFJUDICATUREAT Bl LASPU R CHHATTISGARH W. P.(S). N0.67^& /2006 PETITIONER l^ RAJKUMARDHRUW Ageabout40year, S/o Shri Vishram Singh Dhruw Asstt. Teacher, Girls PrimarySchool Sisdevry Block-Palari, Distt. -Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT 1. \>s^ ^^ ^•° \1 ^:^ ^^^ 2. State GovtofChhattisgarh Through Secretary Educational Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Distt.-Raipur(C.G.) DistrictEducation Officer Raipur, District-Raipur(C.G.) Block EducationOfficer Palari, District-Raipur(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/2S7 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Petitionermosthumblysubmitsasunder:- . ^f-u (^^'••-••"^'1. 3. XI-HC-78 3fI^T?)TR-fi+ (m3:n^?Ta>*fi<ti *11*IWI SbNiqi 3^ •<<iqi<1<4, »Tfltf'l<o,Rldlti^ —iuf7r^yb7l<t>/&fc_ ^t.^^.y.r.'..;..t..^ 200 Sii^s'i Mach (I'lt^i^) wcnwBfersn^r 11.12.2008 Shri Somkant Verma, coufisel Smt. Anju Ahuja G.A. for tjie The petitioner is workirjg Schooi. In the course ofhis servj obtained B-Ed. certificate at his otvn According to iearned courlsel two advance increments in viewl Yashwant Kumar BhEradwai for the petitioner. t)ie respondents/State. as Assistant Teacher in Government :e as Assistant Teacher, the petitioner has expenses before 1.3.1999. 1 for the petitioner, petitioner is entitted to lof the decision of this Court in the case of LVs. iVIunicipa! corDoration. Dura and another reported in 20g6J2LR Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs| (supra), came to the oonolusii B.Ed./B.T.i- Examination Certjficfrte the circutar dated 24.12.1998 ist Pradesh. Further in the matter of M.P. and others reported in Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior 1.3.1999 wherein it is providei|l acquired B.Ed. degree at thelr shall be entitled to hvo advanc4 case of Rakesh Kumar Shriv^stava otherspassed in Original /apptic^tion wherein it is observed that the| applicabie retrospectivety. Thus,| has obtained B.Ed. degree increments. 'nKiFci'ifl-f iiK<-iTfftecfl'tRf+<ii< ^i3lf^T3n^T PJR - GG 86. This Court in the case Municipal Corporation, Durg and another n that the teachers, who had obtained on their own expenses, are covered by ;ued by the State Government of Madhya mt. Manorama Shrivastava Vs. State of 2d00 (1) MPLSR 136, the Madhya Pradesh ilB ctivn betore Bench while considering the cireular dated that the Assistant Teachers who have cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 increments, relied on the decision in the Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and No. 1632/1999 decided on 12.10.1999 circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made a teacher may be Assistant Teacher, who 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advanced r.l.u. XI-HC-78 an^Tqirl^iN; TOT3n^Tsh*<[ct) *11*1MI St)*11<h 3^'^IFTR:ra', OTll+ns, Rldttiy .w.e..(.^.^.^lb.^ ~s- V^ 200 3<i^i <<atn (lfc=li^<!l<i!T) ?RnwfffN'3n^?r It is pointed out by the that the then State of Madhya against the orders passed by thj dismissed the Special Leave Pe) of the tribunal. Therefore. the di| 1.3.1999 cannot be made appliq becomes fina! and the same Teachers, who have obtained B. further substantiated by a circulbr State of Madhya Pradesh wh^- decision ofthe Hon'ble Supreme| Learnecf counsel for the question of law involved in th< covered by the decision of thij Bharadwaj (supra) to which) respondent/State fairly concedej .learned counsel appearing for th^ Accordingly, the writ pe1| this Court in the matter of Yashiwlant of the fact as to whether the pe( own expenses as perthecirculaj whether he has been paid two costs. tiiofd'fl-i iiH<tTffte<^l'<Ri+<ii< ^3I^IT3T[^T 1'arned counsel appearing for the petitioner Ipradesh had filed a Special Leave Petition ^ Tribunai and the Hon'ble Supreme Court fition No. 1999/2000 filed against the order rection to the effect that the circular dated |[ble retrospeotively, passed by the Tribunal, shalt be applicable to all the Assistant ?.Ed./BTI certificates before 1.3.1999. It is dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present •ein the circular ctearly states about the ICourt. tietitioner lurther submits that the facts and present case of petitioner are squareiy Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar tearned counsel appearing for the and agrees with the averments made by petitioner. (tion is allowed in terms of the decision of Kuamr Bharadwaj subject to verification jtioner has acquired B.Ed. certifioate at his dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and Surther idvance increments or not. No order as to Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O.