IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BIIASPUR w.P.(S)No. K326 [2010 / 4. Joint Director, Treasm'y Account Pension Jashpur, Distt.Jashpul(C.G.) WRIT PETITION UIA 2261227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA & PETITIONER : Anand kumar Panda S/o Harihar Panda ‘ Aged about 54 years , Governmmt higher secondary School Patthalgaon, Vikas khand- Patthalgaon DisttJashpur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS Stae of Chham'sgarh through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department Wafi ".. @x‘yygxo 2. D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Conimissioner Tribal Welfaxe Jashpur Distt.Jashpul(C.G.) ‘ Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Jashpur DisttJashpur(C .G. HIGH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR TWRIT PET!TION (S) NO.1320 OF 2010 v PETmoNER Anand Khmar Panda (}“2/ ' Versus RESPONDENIS State of Chhattisgavh & Otha's (Writ Petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India} ; 7 Singne Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotrg Jr. : ‘ bresent '- Shn Deepak Jain Advomte forthe petitioner Shn A V Sndhar Panel Lawyer forthe State ORDER (ORAL) (Passed on this 29m day of March 201 0) 1) Wtth the cansent of leamed counsel appeanng for the partlos ‘ - the petition is heard finally . 2)» By this petition, the petitioner seeks g direction to the . respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of B.T.i. examination, on his own expenses, before. entering into service. 3) : Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the ’l I issue invoived in the present case isvno ionger res infegra as, the same has been considered and decided bytthe Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena v; State of MP. & 'Orsf as well as by this > Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwejv. Municipal Corporation,- Durg‘ end anotherz ‘and Gopesh Kumar Verme v, The State Gavt. of Chhatfisgam and anether". l 2009 (m) MPJR (SC)59 2006 (in MPJR-oe 96 WP (S) No 4130 or 2005 . \ Gowri ?/? M4) - Learned counsel further submits that the instant petition is ‘ squarely covered by the decisiohe(supra) as aforestated: Thus, : the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decisions, subject to verification of the facts. 5) Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the : event, the petitioner makes a representations, the same wiii be i considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light » of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena (supra) , as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj (supra) and , Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of six weeks e from the date of receipt of the representation. i In view of foregoing, according to the learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. 7) Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. . 6%