--'.,...? ^r mGHGQURTOFCHHATTISGARHATBILASPlJR PETITIONERS WMT PETITIONfS) N0. 79 of2008 : 1. Shivcharan Patel, S/6 Shri Ishwari Prasad Patel, Assistant Teacher, Aged — 44 years, .Presently Posted at, Primary School Kunmmauna, Block - Gharghoda, District Raigarh(C.G.) - 2. Surajbhaa Patel, S/o Shri Lekliram Patel, Assistant Teacte, Preseiitly Posted at Primary School Kamtara, Bloek - Ghar^ioda, District Raigarfa(C.G.) 3. Sundannaiu Kondh, S/o Shri Thatidarain Kondh, Assistant Teacher, Presently Pwted at Primaiy School Siimda, Block - Ghai-gtiQda, District Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS • .1 ; : . l.StateofC.G. Through: Secretary, Department of School Educafion, D.K.S. Bllawan, Raipur .(G.G.), ., . :,. - 2. Director, Tribal Wetfare, District.Raigarh (C.&) ,,,,.,.^:,.^^^^;^^ • 3. Assistant Conmiissioner, Departnient of Tnbal Welfare, District Raigarh (G.G.) 4. Block Educafion Qfficer, Distriot Raigarh (C.G.); -;. „,. ^. ..V:1 . • - : WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTrTUTION QF INDIA • . ; " : ';: :: . : 1 8B: Hon'Ue Shri Satish K. Asmhotri, J. SPONDENT8 Preseat: w .- Shri Maneesh Shanna, Advocate fbr the petitkiners. Shri U.N.S.Deo, Govemment Advocate with Shri Arvind Dubey, Paael Lawyer foi- the State/respondents. ORALQRDER (Passedon 08tt day ofJaauary,2008) ' Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the State/respondents jointly submit that tfte fact and question 6f law involved in the present writ petition are the same tp that of in Yashwaut Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Munldpal Corporation, DUF| and another (2006 (II) MFJR-CG 96}, which has been disposed Qf videorder dated 03.04.2006. iKISISSft'' BUIIiK^aB! vssss'ss In subsequent cases, i.e., Writ Petitioa (S.) No.4130 Kumar Venna vs. TheState Govt. ofChhattisgarh andanothw) and other eonneeted matters, decided by this Court on 15-12-2006, purauanttothe memo dated28-1-1995, issuedbythe Secretary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospectus of-Diploma in Education Examination, it wasclarified fUat the nomenclature offhe Basic Training Institute, i.e., B.T.I. has been changed andrenamed as Diploma in Education, i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, tfae D.Ed. Certificate holders are alsocovered by the deeision in Writ Petition (S.)No.4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kwnar Vwnw vs. The State Gavt. of Chhattisgea'h andanothw) (Supra). Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms ofthe order passed in the case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Mumcipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to verification of the fcet asto whetherfhe petitioners have acquired D.Ed. Exammation Csrtificate ontheir own expenses as pertfae circulars dated 24.12.1998 aad 01.03.1999 and further whether fhey have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as tocosts. ' Sd/- SatishK-Agmbotn , Judge ^riitj J:;; IIUiiiiLS