^V9cf- lv..^e/ ••"""Cj^.^-^"""" a^ 'p^^S^^-""""""""" ' L^^2^(^ datS*--- In the Honble High Court of Chhattishgarh at Bilaspur (C.G.) W.P.(S) No. ^(c^ 2006 Petitioner Ramesh Kumar Hirwani aged 38 yaars S/0 Shri Ramadhar Hirwani, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Hr. Sec. SGhool ,Arjunda Durg Tahsil & District,Durg. VERSUS Respondent / 1. The State Govemment of Chhattishgarh, Through the Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (G.G.) 2. The Block Education Officer, / Durg (C.G) Writ petition under articles 226/227 of the Constitution pf India for issuance of writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, Certiorari, Prohibition and other suitable WR££or writs, Order or orders, Direction or directions. The petitioner, above named, fiirnishes the particulars pf the writ petition as under :- 1 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Petitioner Respondents Petitmner Respondents Pfetitioner Respondcnts Petitioncr Rcspondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W, P, (s)Jlo. 610Sof2006 Prem Sukh Sahii Versus State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & aaother W. P. (s) No. 6106 pf 2006 Rohit Kumar Chandrakar Versus State Govt. ofChhattisgarh &, others W, P,(s1 No. 6107 of 2006 Smt. DiptiTtwari Versus State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 6109 of2006 Ramesh Kumar Hirwani Versus State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & ofhers W. P. (s) No. 61 10 of2006 Sanjay Kuinar Siagh Vcrsus State Govt. ofChIiattisgarh & others W. P. fs) No. 6119 of2006 Babulal Deshmukh Versus State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & othere And W. P. (s) No. 6120 of 2006 Vcrsus Dwarika Prasad Dewaagan State Govt. ofChhattisgarh & othcrs Slng^e Beach: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satlsh K. Agnlhotrl. Shri Ajay Shrivastava, Advocate for thc Petitioners. Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt Advocate for thc State/rcspondcDts. ^ 2H QRDER (8& November, 2006) The petitioncrs are worldng as Assistant Teacliers/Lecturers in the govenunent schools. In fhe course of their semees as Assistant Teachers/Lecturers, they have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. exaiaiaation ccrtifk-ates on their own expenses before 1.3.1999. Writ Petitkm (s) No.s 6105/2006,, 6106/2006, 6107/3006, 6109/2006, 6110/2006, 6119/2006 and 6120/2006 are feeii^ disposed ofby this common orderas the facts and questioa oflaw iavolved ia these petitions are comnion. 3. •'Aceoriing fe tearned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entMed to two advance increinents in view offhe decision of this Court ia the case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwai Vs. Mumcioal Corporation. Durp and another {2006 (11) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg aad another (Supra), came to fhe conclusion that the teacheis, who had obtained B. Ed. /B.T.I. Examiaation Certificate on their own expenscs, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 (Annexure P/l) issued by the State Governinent of Madhva Pradesh. 4. Furtheir in fhe inatter of Siat. Manorama SIuwastava '^^ State of M.P. and ofhera {2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R, 136 } the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench, whfle considermg the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherein, it is provided that the Assistant Teachers, who have acquired B.Ed. degree at their own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shaU be entitted to Iwo advaacc increinents, relied on decision in fhe case of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. & othere passed in O.A.No. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999 wherein it is observed fhat fhe circular dated 1.3.1999 cannotbe made applicable retrospectively. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advaace increments. — - — ^ .2-5 It is pointed out by leanned counsel appearing for the petitioaers fhat the fhea State of Madhya Pradesh had filed a Special Leave Petition against the ordere passed by fhe Tn'bunal and fhe Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 fUed agauist the order ofthe Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the effect that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicablc retrospectively, passed by the Tribunal, becoines final and the same shatl be applicabte to all fhe Assistant Teachers who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. Examination Certificates before l.3.1999. It is fui-ther substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State of Madhya Pradesh wherein tbe circiilar clearly states about fhe decision of the Supreme Court. 6. Leamed counael for the petitioners fiirther submits fhat fhe facts and question of law involved in the present case are squarety covered bv decision of this Coiirt in the case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and anofher (Supra), to which leamed counsel appearing for fhe respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the averment made by learaed counsel appearing for the petitioners. 7. Accorfingly, fhese writ petitions are allowed in tenns of the order passed in tiie case of Yashwant Kuiuar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and anofher (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whefher the petitioners have acquired B.Ed./B.T.I. Examination Certificates on fheir own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further whefher ttiey have been paid two advance increinents or not. No orier as to costs. 8, A copy of thisorder be placed on record ofconnected mattera. Bablu Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge