:~%^-- •wi Bi »K {^ S BPN!*i ;E.yi;i.i»-y MtheHOnt>leSHitil3sG^ ofX;ffia^sli(i^ at^B^^ .:^^n;:xg^^|^.P^.,^No.-;.::;;'g^;^^ r Petitibner ...^(1^She6PrasadVerma.Aged50Years.S/o Shri IVIohan Lal Verma, Leeturer, ©ovt. Highei-SeconGlairy^cRool,Kusuml<asa,Distt ,Dyrg'(CG}:..';:'.' •••;'':.\::^ .^%^)SmtRQ6pa<3ypta,Ag^g%8'%a^ ,\i^fii'/^ ^' R-P§!NUPta.l^eturer^c^. Multipu^ ••'.'/^.(^l^^1. ',.:'SeG^eh^^ i^®^\^:/'.c:::''.'^^ ^^^'s^^^^ ^ ^^'^ ' ^^ ^ >/;/::. :^-:--::: .^.•Hir.Sec.^ ,:'...,:,^:'.;:'' '-Vers'us-',;; . ; • . :" •' ., •' Respondent .....^ (1) StateGovt. ofGhl-iattisaarh 'y ThFough:-Seg;retary, EduGati6n&Tribal Departrrient, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raiipur (e:B-)^.':;;-;v.:.:,^.^ ^^,^^B\stT^Ed^(^onO^ . .•• ^:Durg.(G.G.) . Writ petition under artiGl6s 226 of the Constitytiorr? of India -l': •':'..':'.•'. :^;;':'' forjssyanceofwrjtinthenaturebflVIANDAIUUS. |!?.-r XI-HC-78 Bablu 4 3^'-<ii'iiiM^, ®Tn^'i$,i»iciitf^< ^—..^.-.P-.C^1^0. 62-7 Hi*<^Ts»i*i|ch"•••••••............•,^ 2Q07 3)1^1 Ma<»»('I^p^T) 'bi^M^ Kitii-fTfffei,'! <fayi< ^?3Ti^T3II^T ^r. Ajay Shrivostava, ctaunset for the petitioners. tes. Sunita Jain, Panel l^iwyer for the respondents/Stttte. With -riie consent of learned counffi! for +he parties, the matters are heard finally <md|clt^}osed of. Common order dictatejd in V/.P. (s) No. 626 of 2007 in open Court, passed separately. A copy of this order petitions. placed on record in connected writ ••.•..Scl/-:, ^Satisli^g Judge] P.T.O. ->-7 ^) tC<i^ MI6H COUR-F OT CHHATTIS6ARN AT BIl.AffUR SIN6t£BEI^M : WON'BLEMR SATISHK A^IIMOTRIsJ, WRTT PETmONfaV N0. 626 OF 2007 Petitioners versus Respondents TejPratap Singh ond ofhers State 6ovt. of Chhatt-isgarh anel o-thers WRTT PETTTION feV N0. 627 OP 20)7 Petitioners Resuondents versus Sheo Praa>d Verma cnd others State 6ovt. of Chhatt'isyxrh and others Petitioner WRrr pErmoN M NO ^s OF 2007 Srat. Koalta Sinhd (Befere mapria9e Ku. Kwta SirivasTam versus Respondents The State of Chhatt-isgarh andl others Present ; Mp.AjcyShrivofilava.counselfprthepetitioners. Ms. Sunitajain, Pcmel tawyer for 1+ie Stafte/ respondents. O R & E R O'assedorithis 1st Febnnry, 2007) 1. Leamed counsel ofspear'mg fw the petitioners as well as leamed Penal lawyer oppearing for •the respondents/5'hate jointly, submit •Hiat the facts ond question of taw inwlved in the pFesent writ f petition are squarsly covered by -the cfecision of this Court- h'l the ooss of 'yasfmwfif Kumer Bharadwaj •vs. Mwiicipal Cmpofwlion. t)wy and eawthe^'. 2. Leamed counset appearing for the petitioner has pomted put 't-he circular dated 13.9.1997 (Annexure P/l), whereunder according to F~3 '^^ ^rj^ ths petitioners, the petitioners, who had ohtained B.Ed. ExnminationCertifiMi'tesbeforeappointfflent.arealsoentittedto two advance increments. The respondents/State, while considering thecases of the peti+ioners,shall gront the relief.in accordonce with the circular (suprn). For theafoi'ementioned reasons, these writ petitions (»r«disposed of in terms of the decision of this Court in the matter of Yad^want Kunmr £ a/arf*^/'(5upro),subject to verification of the foct asto whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed. Cert-ificates at their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24-12-1998 ond 1-3-1999 <md further whe-ther they have been paid two adwance increments or not. Nb order as to costs. A copy of this order be placed on record in connected writ petitions. Sdfe., •SatishsKjg Judge; '^) %. Bablu 1 2006CtI)WJR-CS96