^ <z-. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S) No. ^/l1 / 2011 PETITIONER A^~<^ ^<y^/" Smt. Jessy Sanjay W/o Late Shri Sajay V. Mathew, Aged about 44 years, Occupation - Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School Khandsara Distt. Durg (CG). VERSUS ^^ KESPONDENTS 1. State of Chhattisgarh , Through-The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ^ 3. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur (C.G.) District Education Officer District Durg (CG) WRITPETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA M] ^^- HiGH COURTOFCHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA. J. W.P.(SlNo.514of2011 PETITIONER Smt.JessySanjay. Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarhandothere. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 225 OF THECONSTITUTION ( IND1A. Shri Vipin Thyari, counsel for petitioner. Shri Yashwant Singh, Deputy Advocate Generat for the State. ORAL ORDER (31W1/2011) Following oral order of the Court was passed by Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. Heard. (2) Leamed counset appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of two advance increments on account of she having passed B.Ed. examination before her appointment at her own cost. It is submitted that the issue involved in the present petition is no ionger res integra and the same has been finally decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case ofAsha Saxena vs. SSate of M.P. & Ors., reported in 2009 {11!}MPJR {SC}59. (3) itis further submitted that this Court has also taken a similarview in ite order dated 06/02/2009 passed in W.P. (S) No. 6257 of 2008. Learned counsel for the petitioner further draws attention of this Court to order dated 29/04/2010 passed in Writ Appeal No. 124 of 2009, wherein relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another Writ Appeal No. 87/2009, directionshavebeen issued for consideration.ofthe case for grant of two advanee increments as per circular dated ^21/09/1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verification of ! the facts pleaded in the petition. '2^> (4) Learned counsel for the respondents submitsthat case of the petitioner would also be considered on the same lines. (5) In view of the statement made above, this petition is finally disposed off with a direction to the respondent authorities..to consider and decide the ciaim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increment as per cireular dated 21/09/1974 issued by theState of Madhya Pradesh, after verification of the facts pleaded in the petition within a period of eight weeks from today. —___—_^^_—.____ Sd//- 1 Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge aigniaia