'as'<=^; 'rs' ^'Sr';'fe:SPL e^'3-Q^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH v W.P.IS) N0. y^i^ / 2006 Petitioner ^ ^":»< ^'.'•/•'^"^ ..••' ^••\^y '.<y\^" iy >^-'.^' ^"^- Muntazim Ahmad Siddique, /^ S/o. Shri Late Munsif Ahmad Siddique, Aged about 41 years, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Girl's Middle School, Pali, Tahsil & Block Pali, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) vy VERSUS Respondents ^"' .0 -•^ t-i ,)^( 1. State of Chhattisgarh & Others r Through- The Secretary, Department of School Education/ T.W.D., D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Commissioner^ Tribal Welfare Department Chhattisgarh Government, Raipur(C.G.) 3. Asstt. Commissioner,/' Tribal Welfare Department, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) WRFT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WRIT. WRITS. DIRECTION ETC TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARH AT BiLASPUR SiNGLE BENCH : HON'BLE MR. SAT1SH K. AGNIHOTRI. J. WRiT PETiTiOMfSJ N0.5899 OF 2006 Petitioner Resoondents Versus Shyam Kartik Gupta State of Chhattisgarh and others WRiT PETiTSON (S.) N0.5696 OF 2006 Petitioner Respondente Versus Muntazim Ahmad Ssddique State of Chhattisgarh andothers WRIT PETiTiON ?S.) N0.5694 OF2006 Petitionsr Padum Kumar Sahu versus Respondents State of Chhattisgarh and Others Present : Mr. A.S. Rajput, counsel for the petitisners in all the petitions. Mr. Utkarsh v'erma, Deputy Government Advocate for the respondents/State in ait the petitions. ORDER (Passed oh 26tn of October;2006) The petitioners are working as Assistant Teache|S in Government Schools. In the course of their sen/ice as Assistant Teacher, the petitioners have obtained B.Ed. Certificate at their own expensesbefore 1-3-1999. ' 2. Writ Petltions (S.) No. 5699 of 2006, 5696 of 2006 and 5694 of 2006 are being disposed of by this commpn order as the facts and quest'.on of !aw involved jn these petitions are common. 3. According to iearned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitlsd to two advance increments in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj vs. Municipat Cofporation, Durg and another , wherein it has been held that ths Teachers, having obtained B.Ed.. M.Ed.,.B.T.i.^Certificates, at their own expenses, are covered bythe circular dated 24-12-1998 issued by ihe State Governmeni of Madhya Pradesh. 4. 'Further, in the matter of Smt. Manorama Shrivastava vs. State of M.P. and others', the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunai, Gwaiior Bench, while considering the circular dated 1-3-1999, wherein it is provided that the Assistant Teachers, who heve acquired B.Ed. Degree at their own cost between 23-10-1964 and 7-5-1973 shail be entiUed to favo advance increments, relied on decision in the case of Rakesh Kumar Shnvastava vs. State of M.P. and others passed in Original ApplicattoR No.1632 of 1999. decided on 12-10-1999, wherein_ it is obsen/ed that the circuiar dated 1-3-1999 cannot be made appiicabie retrospectiveiy. Thus, a Teacher, may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. Degree before 1-3-1999 is entitled to hvo advance increments. 5. . lt is pointed out by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the ihen State of IViadhya Pradesh had filed a Special Leave Petition againsf the orders passed'by the Tribunal and the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petition No.1999 of 2000 filed against the order of the Tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the effect that the cireuiar dated 1-3-1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively, passed by the Tribuna!, becomes fina! and the same shall be appiicabie to ali the Assistant Teachers, who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. Certincates before 1-3-1999. It is furfrter substantiated by a ^ circular datsd 17-10-2003 issued by the pre^tt State of Madhya Pradesh, wherein the circuiar clearly states abodt the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 6, Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that fhe facts and question of law involved in the present cases are squareiy covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Yashwani Kumar Sharadv/aj (Supra), to which learned counsel appearing for the respondents/State fairly concedes and agrees with the averments made by learned counsei appearing for the petitioners. 7. . Accordingly, the writ petitions are allgwed in terms ofthe decision of this Court in the matter of Yaslnvant Kumar Bhamd-waj (Supra), subject to verffication of tha fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired B.Ed. Certificate at their own expenses as per the circuiars dated 24-12-1998 and 1-3-1999 and further whether they have been paid two advsnce increments or not. No order as to costs. 8. A copy of this order be placed'on the record of the connected writ petitions. ' Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ''^ Gopa'i 1 200S (II) MPJR-CG 96 2 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 -^K. u-»y ^ D«-.