v.mKiis RFHPM l^^.^^ .^, 'i^^: - """• c/^l^ IN THE HON'BLE H1GILCQURT QF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1\S^/2010 PETITIONER ..-4^" ^y> A^-^o- €;^-r ..<)^\'y" ^w'\y' <s:'!' .=s!li" ..-•'' <,••/} RESPONDENTS K. K. Rathore, son of Shri Saryu Prasad Rathore, aged about 57 years, Lecturer, Government Boys Higher Secondaiy School, Balouda, Block Balouda District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh Through the Secretary Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer, ^ District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) 3 The Principal Govt. Boys Higher Secondary School, Balouda, District Janjgir-Champa (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATT1SGARHAT BILASPUR WRIT PETmON (S) No. 1 187 of 2010 PETLT10NER RESPONDENTS : K.K.RaUiore. VERSUS : State <rf ChhatUsgarti & CWiere. Writ Petitton Under Articte 226 Of The ConsUhitton Ot India SB: Hon'bte airi Satfsh K. Aanlhotri. J. Present Shri Ashwani Shukla, Advocate tor the petitioner. Shri P.K.Bhaduri, Panel Lawyerforthe State/iespondents. Amit ORALORDER (Passed on 22"'1 day <rf March, 2010) With the consent of leamed counset for the parties, the matter is heaid finalty. 1. By this petitkM, the petittemer seeks a directun to the fespondents to pay two advance increments on passirg of B.T.I. examinafion, on his own evpmses, be<:ore entering into service. 2. Leamed counsei appearii^i for the petiUoner submlts that the issue involved in the present case is no tonger res intBgtaaa the same has been conadeied and declded by the Supreme Court in AdiaSassna v. State ofM.P. & O/s.'as well as by thls Court in the mattBr of Yastivmnt Kunar Bhaiadwaf v. MunwlpsS Corpoiattai, Duig & anotfw^ and Gcyjasli IQimar Vam»v. Tha Stato Govt of CtihatS^aih andanathe?. 3. Shri Shukte furtfter submits that Bie Instant prtition is sqirarely cwered by Uie declston as aforestatBd. Thus, the petittoner n»y be pemiined to mate a repiesenlab'on to the respondent authorides to deckte his cases for gfant of two increments in the light <rf aforestated declslon, aibject to verfficatlon of the fact asto whether the peUUoner tas acquired B.T.t. cerffieatB on his own expenses before entering iniD senrice. 4. Leamed ccwnsel appearing for the State/respondents submits that tn the event, the pettkmer makes a tepresentatton, ttie saroe vwll be coiBidered and decided, in accordance with law and In the light of the dectsions af the Supreme Court in Asha Saxeiw fsupia) as virell as tWs Court in Yashwaiit Kumar Bhaiadw^and Gopesh Kumar Venna (supia), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representaUon. 5. In view of ft)regoing, accoidirg to the learned axinsel appearlr^ for the petitioner, nothing airvives in this peStJon for adjudication. 6. Accordingly, the writ pdition ts disposed of. Satish K. Agnihotri Judge '2009(HI)MP.IR(SC)59 22006(II)MPJR-CG96 3WP(S)No.4130of2005