IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (SI Noo‘b‘A5/2010 /1. Goverdhan Prasad Baghel son of I Shri Balmunkund Baghel, aged about 40 years, Upper Division Teacher, Government Middle School, Binjhra Block Podi—Uproda District Korba (C.G.) /2. 'Santosh Lal Suryawanshi, son of Shri Mohan Lal Suryawanshi aged about 4O years, Upper Division Teacher, Government Middle School, Turnan Block ) Podi—Uproda District Korba (C.G.) /3. Ramnath Kamal son of Shri Bali Ram Kamal aged about 4O years, Upper Division Teacher, Government Tahsil Label Hostel Katghora District Korba (C.G.) VERSUS PETITIONERS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Deportment D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, (C.G.) Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) /'3. Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deportment, Korba RESPONDENTS /’ ’ 1 . District Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE - r V CONSTITUTION OF INDIA V "Tl H!GH COURT OF CHHATHSGARH AT B!LASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 2045 of 2010 PETmONER : Goverdhan Prasad Baghei & Others. VERSUS RESPONDENT-S : State of Chhattisgarh 8: Others‘ WRIT PEJITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTiTUTlON OF INDIA $3: Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihmri .I Present: Shri Somkan‘t Verma, Advocate appearing on behalf of Shri Amit Kumar Sharma, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Shaohank Thakur, P.L. for the Statefrespondents. ORDER (ORAI) (Passed on 30m day of April, 2010) 1. By ihis petition. ihe petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments on passing of B.T.l. examination, on their own expenses. before entering into service. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena V. State ofMP, & Ors.’ 3. Learned counsel further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as atorestated. Thus, the petitioners may he permitted to make representations to the respondent authorities to decide their cases for grant of two increments in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification of the tact oi possession of B.T.l. certificate on their own expenses betore entering into service. 4. Learned counsel appearing tor the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioners make representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decision of the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena (supra) within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. ln View of foregoingaccording to the iearned counsel appearing for the petitioners, nething survives in this petition for adjudication 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Amit l Judge .‘ 200s (tttj MPJR {SC} 59 I