@ k . . Q . g m q w w d i n m g n g g g g g ? . m w u a v x x x § € v i § § A @ 4 9 1 u a z w g g Q . i § % § w § _ § § . & . § v w § - § , § $ E ¥ g ? a m ? m m m m A V $ § m w $ w w £ n § E 3 - § A % V w i g . “ 3 % H r i g w g M a w g w g m a g §%M§“ g M . m m E w m A . w i g m a g m a g i , addawa. g , w . w a n m § w a w m m i . a a E H E m A a g v K i § m § a w m m q x u . V . § H ¢ § § . § $ g % § § \ \ ;/ , , " J} ‘ J31 HK&H COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASPUft W. P. (s) No. 4145 of 2005 Petitioner : Smt. Sanju Shrivastava Versus Respondents : State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhatl-isgorh) <& others W. P.fs) No. 4160 of 2005 Petitioner : Smt. Chameli Verma Versus Rsspondents : State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) & others W. P.fs) No. 4289 of 2005 Petitioner : Smt. Radhika Soni Versus Respondents : State of Madhya Pradesh (Now Chhattisgarh) & others W.P.Cs) No. 4679 of 2005 Petitioner : Ravi Kumar Chandel Versus Respondents : State Govt, of Chhattisgarh & o1+iers W. P. (s) No. 4683 of 2005 Petitioner : Ved Kumari Pali Versus Responctents : State Sovt, of Chhattisgarh & o1+iers W. P. (s^ No. 4844 of 2005 Petitioner : Ashok Kumar Pandey Versus Respondents : State ^ovt, of Chhattisgarh <& others W. P. (s} No. 4845 of 2005 Petitioner : Fagua Ram Punacha Versus Respondents : State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh & others ^^rX^ Petitioner Respondents W.P.fe^ No. 5031 of 2005 Vidyadhar Singh Versus State Govt. of Chhanisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 5032 of 2005 Petitioner : Bhimsen Yadu Versus Respondents : State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & o1+iers W. P. (s} No. 5034 of 2005 Petitioner : R.D. Sahu Versus Respondents : State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh <& o-t+iers W. P. (s} No. 5041 of 2005 Petitioner : Narendra Kumar Thakur Versus Respondents : State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & others W. ?Xs) No. 5042 of 2005 Petitioner : Saheb Lal Janghel Versus Respondents : State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & others W.P.fs^No. 5043 of 2005 Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Syansingh Rajput Versus State Govt. of ChhattiS9arh <& others W. P.(s) No. 5048 of 2005 Bahadur Singh Khushro Versus State ©ovt.of Chhattisgarh & others W. ?.(s} No. 5050 of 2005 Gov'md Nath Shivopashak Versus Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh <& others W. P.(s} No. 5067 of 2005 Chandramanj Chaubey Versus State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh & o1+iers W. P.rs)No. 5077 of 2005 Petitioner : Ramvilas Sahu Versus Respondents : State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh & others W. PXs) No. 5109 of 2005 Petitioner : Gajendra Kumar Yadav Versus Respondents : State Sovt. of Chhattisgarh & ol+iers W.P.fs^No. 5110 of 2005 Petitioner : Santoshkumar Shrivastava Versus Respondents : State Govt. of Chhattisgarh <& others W. P.{s) No. 5111 of 2005 Petitioner : Radheshyam Verma Versus Respondents : State Govt. of Chhattisgarh <& o1+iers W.PMNo. 5115 of 2005 Pardeshiram Chelak Versus State Sovt. of Chhattisgarh & others And W. ?.(s} No. 5116 of 2005 Petitioner : Chaindas Sahu Versus Respondents : State ^ovt. of Chhattisgarh & others ^^ ) Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr, Justice Satish K. Agnihotri- Shri Manish Sharma, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri V.V.S Moorthy, Dy, Advocate Ger\erat with Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy, ^ovt Advocate for the respondents/State, ORDER (9th October, 2006) 1. Learned coun^l oippearing for the petitioners submits that while working <xs Assistoont Teachers/Upper Division Teachers, the petitioners have gone on training to improve tiieir qualifjcations on their own expenses and acquired B.Ed./B.TJ Examination Certificate, 2. The present writ petitions. bein9 W.P.(s) Nos. 4145/2005, 4160/2005, 4289/2005, 4679/2005, 4683/2005. 4844/2005, 4845/2005, 5031/2005. 5032/2005, 5034/2005, 5041/2005, 5042/2005. 5043/2005. 5048/2005. 5050/2005. 5067/2005, 5077/2005. 5109/2005, 5110/2005, 5111/2005, 5115/2005, and 5116/2005 involve ss'milar facts and common question of law, Thus, these petitions are being disposed of by this common order, 3, According to learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are entitled to two advance increments in view of 1+ie decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs, Municipal Corporation. Durg and another (2006 (II) MPJR-C^ 96}. This ^ aaa&sasiS^,^, Court in the cas^ of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs, AAunicipal Corporation, Durg and cxnother (Supra), came to 1+ie conclusion that the teachers, who had obtained B. Ed,/B.TJ. Exarnination Certificate on his own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by the State Sovernment of Madhya Pradesh 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law involved in 1+ie present cases are squarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and orsother (Supra), to wht'ch {earned coun^l appearing for the respondents fairly concedes cnd agrees with the averment made by learned counsel cxppearing for the petitioners. 5. Accordingly, the writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs, Municipal Corporation, Durg <xnd another (Supra), subject to verifiaxtion of the fact as to whether the petttioners have acquired B. EdVB.TJ* Exami'nation Certificate on their own expenses or not. No order as tocosts. Subhash 6. A copy of this order be placed on record of other connected writ petitions. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge