HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETIT10N fS) No. 2982 of 2009 PETITiQNERS Kumar 4. RESPOIMDENTS 2. Dubey S/o Late Shri Krishna Dubey, aged about 35 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. P.S. Ganiyari, Block Durg, Distt. Durg, (C.G.) Dilip Kumar Gajpal S/o Late Shri Kishori Lal Gajpal, aged about 38 years, Head Master, Primary School Tolagaon, Block Durg, Distt. Durg(C.G.) Mannu Ram Patel S/o Late Shri Sumeri Ram ' Patel, aged about 40 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School, Khursul, Block Durg, Distt. Durg (G.G.) Rajkapur Parkar S/o jShri Bisaho Ram Parkar, aged about 45 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School Anjora (Dhaba) Biock Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) VERSUS State Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Throughthe Secretary, Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) The District Education Officer, Durg, Distt. Durg (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aanihotri, J. Prasent: Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for ths petitioner. i Shri Y.S.Thakur, Deputy Advocate Genera! with Shri Arvind Dubey Panel Lawyer for the State/respondents. (Passed on 25ln day of June, 2009) . Heard. ' . 1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitloner submits that the petitioners are entitled to grant of two increments as they have obtained D.Ed. certificate on their ownexpenses during the serviee period. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioners may be 3. granted liberty to make a representation to the authorities for grant of two increments pursuant to the judgment and order passed by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another and Gopesh Kumar Verma vs. The State Govt. of C-hhatSsgarh and anothei^. The State Government is under an obligation to foltow the law settled by this Court and it is not necessary to approach this Court by each and every empioyeewhen the law has already been settled by this Court. The employees, who are simiiarly situated and have not approached the Court, may be treatedat par Nth other employees, who have approached this Court. It is not necessary to approach this Court forsimilar order. In view of the foregoing reasons, this petition stands disposed ofwith liberty reserved to the petitioners, on the request of learned counsel, to make a representation. If the representatlon is fited by the petitioners, the same may be considered and decided, in accordance wlth law on its own merit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of .eight weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, subject to verification of the facts^ Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge !<VR 12006 (ii) MPJRCG96 2WP(S)No.4130of2005