S.B. (Service Matteri IN THE HIGH CQUKT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CHHATHSGARH) WRIT PETITION (S) N0302^ /2011. PETITIONER: Y'' Respondents ••"14^'Y" ^'^<y .•"i^.< b.y ^^y ..••"'".<3^''' y .**" ^yx ^^/" Bramhnarayan Sahu, son of Chaitram Sahu, aged about 57 years, working as Upper Division Teacher Khargaon, Block Kasdole, Education District Baloda Bazar, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. versus ^ ! • 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary Education Departraent, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2.' District Edueation Officer, Distriet BalodaBazar, Chhattisgarh. ^ 3. Block Education Officer, Kasdole, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 4. Joint Du-ector, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipiir, District Raipur, C.G. WRITPETITION UNDERARTICLE 2260F THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA i.J.-l 311^1 W R-f '(TSTT-STI^T sh*i|ch "•f HWW *^fT<*i 3~5T •<<i<<id<4, ytflyiia, fsiwi«^< ^,...Uf.^..^^.^L WI. 200 311^1 TPR? (1c!fj«l<itT) TOnw^ftefsn^i FSB : Hon'ble Shri Manindral <tii<i[<n«ili'RWcif "41^et <R'I'(^K ^73(fiCT3I)^I Mohan Shrivastava. J.1 for the petitioner. Dy. Advocate General for fhe 16.6.2011 Shri K. P. Sahu, counsep Shri Y.S. Thakur, State/respondents, on advante copy. Heard on admission. Learned counsel appea|ring for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to b MPJR fSC) 59. It is further submitted snefit oftwo advance mcrements dn account of he having pas^ed B.T.I examinatlon before hts appomtment at his own co|st. It is submitted fhat the issue involved in fhe present petifjon is no longer res mtegra and fhe same has been finaUy decid^d by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashu Saxena v*. State ofM.P. Ss Ors.. 2009 fflB fhat this Court has also taken a simUar view in its ord^r dated 06-02-2009 passed in W.P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. j^amed counsel for the petitioner further draws attention of ffctis Court to order dated 29-04-2010 passed ui Writ Appeal No.l2|4 of 2009, wherein relying upon the judgment of the Supreme (pourt m the case of Asha Saxena (supra) and the order passed No.87/2009, du-ections have Iby this Court m another Writ Appeal ibeen issued for consideratton of the s»- j '.; EBS''' .lf XI-HC—78 sn^v w W\'h 'tT^n -STI^T sh+ilqi I. • Praveeii ^F 'S^ ^wwii, aniwi'a, fsxniyy HIICTI a»*iic»» "" " ' '"^ 200 3^1 'q^Hi' (ij^q^r) TOiIW^feTOT^t 2 case for grant of two advanc 21-09-1974 issued by the verification of fhe facts pleadejd in fhe petition. Leamed counsel for tt] the petitioner woiild also be d ^>hl<?i<fti Tqri^f -fif fe^ ^if^K ^siRnsn^r e increments as per eirciilar dated State of Madhya Pradesh, after ie respondents submits fhat case of insidered on the same Unes. In view of the statei|aent made above, this petition is finaUy disposed off wifh a dit^ction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide fhe cl^itn of fhe petitioner for grant oftwo advance increments as per c|u'cular dated 21-09-1974 issiied by the State of Madhya Prad pleaded in the petition, with4i a period of fhree months from the date of receipt of copy of fhls brder. sh, after verification of the facts ^^aMohanSbrteastava ".•^r:-T-'":Judge