^ \^.Ms^^ ^- ^- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P;(S) No. ^ -20\\ /^etcr PETITIONER Ravi Pradhan S/o Late Shri Keshav Pradhan, Aged about 46 years, OcGupation - Lecturer, Govt. Hlr. Secondary School Kurud Bhilai Distt Durg (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS / ^s ^ ^^^ / .•»"- .•^^' &.. •* .^.^ °^/' "^y 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur (C.G.) 3. District Education Officer District Durg (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA .^';'\~~'^k : /'^:f^ ~\ »>---•?%>, EXI-HC-22 i;^:a^' an^rqn h-H<h Sf^S Stlliqi ^lfi?[ ^- ^-•^. 'TSg •^FlRTq. :3^ftOTS. r»lcll'M'i< 31T^T Tp-^ ..^..{>.(s.^..Y^?.:...s%/11 '^' 200 111CTI Shlich feS^T" aii^r l^nwaftg SB: Hon'bte Shri Manindra Mohdn Shrivastava. J 10-01-2011 Shri Vipin Thwari, counsei fo Shri Ajit Singh, Panel Lawyet- for the Stete/respondents. Heard. Learned counsel appearing for ihe petiUoner submits that the petitioner js ent'rtled to benefit of two advahce increments on account rf he-having passed B.Ed examinaUon before| submitted that the tssue involved integra and the same has been fin^illy decided by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in tte case of AshaSaswna vs. SKate ofM.P. & Ors.. 2W9 flll) IWJft/SC) 59. order dated ( -02-2009 passed in for the petitioner further draws 29-04-2010 passed in Writ ^ipeal judgment of the Supreme Court in increments as per cireulardated Pradesh, after verification ofthe fa| In view of fte statement matl with a direction to the respondent i^ '»i«iln<ll'iiwcil' 4 fs^S <h^\< ^SlPOT 311^1 the petttioner. his appointment at his cwn cost. It is in the present petNon is no longer res It is ftirther submitted that tHis Court has also taton a similar view in Its W.P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. Leamed counsel attention of this Court to order dated No.124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the the case of Asha Saxena {supia) and the order passed by this Court in aifother Writ Appeal No.87/2(X)8, direrttons have been issued for considerat|on <rf the case for grant of fewo advanee ;1-(»-1974issued by ttie State of Madhya rts pteaded in the prttiw. Leamed counsel for the res^ondents submits tttat case of the petitioner woutd also be considered on the stime lines. e above, Uiis peUtton is flnally disposed off uthorities to conskier and decide the ctaim [^tfeA w^B^BBiaBBagfaii^^i^BBSs^ifflKBaiBiBtai^f^mBtTrff^^ ^JI^II ji ?I^^J aSpnf BAeiSBAijqs ueqoi\[ BJpuiBB^ ! -/PS ':.;-%' •Aepot tuo4S>|esM vfiw 10 pouod aift ^o uoseoyusA J@ye 'tisspejd eAypewl ps}ep jBinoJp jed se siueiuajiouj 8oueAp|e lii^Ue hE±)l£i^ >l?»teJ> [?iSJ [< JUhlk l.|bta]bllb uiiffl»uo'wsd aw ui pepeaid SIOB) 10 e»etgsin Aq psnssi MSI.-eO-tZ OM»p »uejB jq} jieuoiiBed syt io BSjtt. ^felEia tt^UE .teSafej. °"? 1itt........._.._.»....,....._........i&(tf&lUhlh (^^-^^^f--— ife.feh. 1^U& •>T;H.II->iy 'Sli (llft 'bUlblh- tS£. c^ iptoaa U2]»IblhUS I^IK ifc'll-b] ffete^UE ^aSE.S'5'".! .-S'^'S1^',. •yy^ • '^ •! ''S'r^SS^ ii ZZ-;3H|X^aSB&-«; (j ' \.M"