gs HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH: BILA$PUR writ Petition (S) No. 1319 ofzo‘os yé/ Petitioner Jhanak Ram Choudhary, son of Late Alekh Ram Choudhary. aged about 43 yeafs, Head Master, Primary School, Telipaii, Block Pusaur, District Raigarh (GG). Versus Respondents 1) State of Chhattisgarh, through the Secretary, Department of Schaol Education. D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (CG). 2) The District Education Officer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (CG). 3) The Block Education Officer, Pusaur, District Raigarh (CG). (Writ Petition under Articie 226 of Constitution of indie) SB: Hon’bie Mr. Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present: Mr. Harishankar Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. .Mr. Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Adv. Generalifor the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed on this 3‘“ day or April, zoos) With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the mader is heard nnally. 2} Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as for the smteirespondents jointiy submit that the fact and question of iaw involved in the present writ petition are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Burg and another‘, which has been disoosed of vide order dated 3-4-2006 Learned oounsei appearing for the respondents does not controvert the said submission 3) in subsequent/cases Ie Wnt Petition (Si No 4139 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma Vs The State Govt of Chhattlsgarh and another) and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-1 2-2006, pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995. issued by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospectus of Diploma in Education Examination, it was ciarified that the nomenciature of the Basic Training institute i.e.. B.T.l., has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Certihcate holders are also covered by the decision in Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra). l\‘}. ‘ 2006 (ii) MPJR -ce 96 4) Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the ord'ér passed in the Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj (supra), subject to verification of the fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed. Examination Certificate on his own expenses as per the circulars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 and further whether he has been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. i Sd/— Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Gowri