^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR W.P.tSt No. 7615 of 2007 PETITtONERS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. RESPOMDENTS 1. 2. 3. Krishnaram Saliu, agcd 56 years Son of Shri Udau-am Sahu, Asst. Teacher, Girl's Prhnary School No.2, Titurdeeh District Durg (C.G.) Narottam Lal Bharati, agerl 50 years, Son of Shri Kisanlal Bharati, Asst. Teacher, Prmiary School, Joratarai (Utaj} District Durg (C.G.) Snit. Prsihha Katare aged 54 years W/o Sltaiiker Rao Katare, Asst. Teacher, Middle School, Borsi District Durg (C.G.) Shiv Kumar Verma aged 42 years S/o Shri Het Ram Venaa Assistaat Teacher, Govt, Primaiy Scbool, Dhaiirabliata District Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Smt. Bharti Tiwari aged 53 years W/o, Shri J.P. Tiwari Assistant Teacher, Navin Govt. Primaiy Schoo], Shakti Nagar, Durg District Durg (C.G.) Sint. Lalita Yadav aeed 52 vears W/o Shti Durga Shaulcar Yadav, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primaiy Kanya School, Titurdehe, Duig DistrictDm^fC.G.) Versas The State Goveminent of Chhattisgarh, Througb fhe Secretarv, Education &, Tribal Department, Raipur (C.G.) The District Durg (C.G.) The District D.K.S. Bhavaa, Mucatiou Officer, Eklucation Officer, Rajnandgaon (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICI^ 326 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDiA Apfiearance: Shri Somkaat. Venna, counsel for the prtitioners. Shri Pradeep Singh, Panel lAwyer for the State on advance copy. t -/'' ^•HS^ie^s^'.^^^-r^ -2.- WP(S) No. 7615/2007 ORAL ORDER (20.12.2007} SUNIL KUMAR SINHA. J Heard on adinission. l^eamed counsel for fhe petitioncrs siitiTnits that the petitioners have passed B.T.I. exainination ou their own expenses, therefore, fhey are entitled to receive two advancc mcrRinents according to circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999. He also sutomits that in many identical inatters, fhe petitions have bcen allowcd in terms of the order passed in the case of yashttXMlt Ku.in.ar BhciraiSfueif Vs. JISunlciital CorporetHon, JOanGf andl euwther f3006 <0j MPJK-CG 96}. He suhmits that the case ofthe petitioners is sqnarely covered by the said judgmcnt. This legal position is not disputed hy the leamcd connsel for the State. Howevcr, he subinits that tjie order may be passed in tenns of the said judgment, hut it shall he siihject to verificafion reganiing petitioners' such qualification. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowerl in terms of tlie order passed in case of Yashwa.nt Kumar Bharafhuaj Vs. Murddpal Corporation, Durg cmd. another (Supra) subject to verification ofthe facts as to whether the petitioners had acquired B.T.I. Examination Certificates on their own expenses as per cjrculars dated 24.13.1998 and 01.03.1999 smd fiirtber whether they have been paid two advance incremcnts or not. The petition stands finalty disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Siiiha Judge vattt '•'•t..'"