IN THE How'ém' HIGH COURT OF cHH'AT'rISGARH Ax T BILASPUR W.P_.1$1 No. Lag? (2010 /’ Smt. Amla Hansra, W/o Late Shri Alfons Lakra, aged about 47 years, working as Tribal Welfare x PETITIONER Department, Govt. Primary School, Barhatuku (Head Master) Block Pharshabahar, 'Distt. Jashpur (C>.G.) VERSUS E REsPoNDENTs Jashpur, Distt.-Jashpur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA t /fl. State of Chhattisgarh Through :— The Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, / 2. D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Deprtment, Jashpur, Distt. — Jashpur (C.G.) Block Education Officer, Block — Pharshabahar Distt. Jashpur (C.G.} Treasury Officer, Treasury Account & Pension Smt. Amia Hansra 3mg Versu5 Petiiioner Respogdent State of Chhatt§sgarh 8. others WIT ETION UNDER ARTICLE OF THE CQNST!TU!ON OF IND$A (SB : Ho’bl Mr. atish K. Agnihotri, J.) Present :_ $ C.K R it he R PTI 226 T ne S - hri J.. ao, Advocate, for the petioner. Shri A.V_ Si‘idhar. Pane! Lawyer for t State. (Passed on 25 Da f April, 2010) e d 1. By mis petiiion, th petitionet seeks a direction to the responents to pay two advance increments on passing of B.Ed examination, 0n her own expenses, before entering into service. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue tnvolved in the present case is no ionger {es mtegra as the same has been considered and decided by me Supreme Court in Asha Saxena y. Sm ofMP. & Ors’as well as by this Court ln the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bhaiadwaj v. Municipal Corpomdon, Duty & anob‘rerg and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. of Chhatz‘isgan‘r andanswer? . 3. Learned counsel furmer submits that lhe instant petition is squareiy covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permttted to make a represenmn‘on to the respondent authorities to decide her case for grant of two increments in the light of aforesiated decision, subiect to vermcation of the fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.Ed. certificate on her own expenses before entering into service. 4. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same wiii be considered and decided, in accordance with taw and in the tight of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ashe 3axena (supra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadmj and Gopesh K'umar Velma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. 5. in view of foregoing, according to the teamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. /. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. Sdl— sATISH K- AGN‘Hm Judge l i 2009 (In) MP‘JR (so) 5s Z 2006 (n) MPJRCG 96 3 more) Ne. 41.309: zoos HIGH COURT OF CHHATYISGARH AT B§LASPUR WRff PETITION (S) NO. 3932 of 2 ORDERQRAL) “ y o .