ICH COURT OF CHHATTNPARH AT RILAQP ‘Writ Pef‘iol‘d No 7:83 (£2337 EEEQEQNER : Radhe Ql1ya 1 Sahu aged 47 years S/o Bhulau Ram Sahu Asswtant Teacher Govt Pnmary School, Khapri, Dhamtari, Distrigt Dhamtari (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS : LThe State Govemmeut of Chhattisgarh, Through the Scarctary, Education Departmcnt DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG\ 2 The Dlstnct Educatmn OEmer Dhamtan (CG) (\VRIT PETITION UNDFR ARTICLE 226 OF THF CONSTITI ITION OF INDIA) (SB. Hon'ble Mr. SatASh K. Agmlmtn, JJ Present : Shm Ajav Shtwewtava Advocate for the petmoner Shn Sahsh Gupta, Deputy Govemment Advocate for the State. ORAL ORDER (Passed an this G4“ 0%hammer, 2007) 1‘ Learned counsel appearing fort he petitioner as well as for the State/respondents jointly submit that the fact and question of law involved in the present writ petition are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bhardwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation Durg and another {2006(11) MPJR- CG 96}, which has been disposed of Vide order dated 03.04.2006. Learned counsel appearing for the State/respondents does not eontrovert the said submission. In subsequent eases, i.e., Writ Petition (S) No. 4130 of 2005 (Gapesh Kumm l} rma L The State Govt ofChham'sgarh and (mother) and other connected matters dectded by t-__s Pourt on 15 1’7 7006 pursuant to the memo dated 28 01 1995, -ssued by the Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospectus of Diploma in Education Examination, it was clarified that the nomenclature of the Basic Training Institute i.e. B.T.I. has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education i.e. D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed Certificate holders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (S) No. 4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma Vs. The State Govt. ofChhattisgarh and anotherj (Supra). 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the ease of Yashwant Kuniar Bhardwal Vs Mumcrpal Corporation, f2ggjmd N / H UR @ another (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioner has acquired D.Ed Examination Cettificate on their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24. 12. 1998 and 01.03.1999 and further Whether he has been paid two advance increments or not. No order asto costs. MK Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge