1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. ^ci5^ /201Q WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTrON OF SNDIA. PETITKyMER ><a ..-'r .../' •- €^^,^'^^"^-'" ^.' "'^"'.^ ':^-^...---A<3 w^. ^ -e;"-"^ 'i RESPQNDENTS Surej Kumar Thakur, aged about 39 years, son of Shri Gandhi Ram Thakur, occupation - Asst. Teacher, Govt. Primary School - Singraitola, Vikash Khand - Ambagarh Chowki, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). VERSUS 1^~ 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of Tribal, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. T Asst. Commissioner, Deptt of Tribal, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) 3. ' Joint Director (Treasury, A/c & Pension), Raipur (CG) 4. Block Education Officer, Block - Ambagarh Chowki, Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG). 01. PARTICULARS ABOUT THE PE \ '3:=T ^raRTq, ®n)yis,'fc(<?iiy^< _^-?.^)^.^U</,~o wqfwiN-wraf- ^'sifrosn^i SB : Hon'ble Shri Manindra IVIohan Shrivastava, J. 28-07-2010 Shri A. N. Bhakta, counsel for tfie petitioner. Shrl Vinod Tekam, Panel La' advance oopy. l-1eard. fi/yer for the State/respondents on Learned counsel appearing {or the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of two] advance increments on account of he having passed B.T.1. examinatior) befbre his appointment at his own cost. It is submitted that the issue irjivolved in the present petition is no longer res integra and the same has|been finally decided by the Hon'bie Supreme Court in the case of Ash^ Saxena vs. State of M.P. & Ors., 2009 011} MPJR (SC) 59. It is lurth^submitted that this Court has also taken a similar view in his oriper dated 06-02-2009 passed in W.P.(S)No.6257 of 2008. Leamed cij)unsel for the petitioner further draws attention ofthis Court to order datejl 29-04-2010 passed in Writ Appeal No. 124 of 2009, wherein relying upoji the judgment of the Supreme Court in the oase of Asha Saxena (supra) ^nd the order passed by this Court in another Writ Appeal No.87/2009,1 directions have been issued for consideration of the oase for grant) of two advance increments as per circular dated 21-09-1974 issued b^t the State.of Madhya Pradesh, after verifioation of the facts pleaded in th^ petition. Learned counsel for the re^pondents submits that case of the petitioner would also be oonsidered bn the same lines. ?r;i,"IT.T—l.'S.147—2/2010—1,00,000. r^ ^ ^i- '^.^-•:". ,.^ 'tt"^'__. ^^: . XJ-HC—78 <il*1CTI SbHlcft 3~5T "4|q|(r|<<, ®t?1<H'IS,f«1<l1iyy ^1:.[£1^.:.'^9.LH./.[0. sn^i •tRw (yft^^q) 3)^1 ^il R-li* TW •a'TT^T ^li<^ Tumgne TRITW ^rfpl 311^1 L In view of the statement disposed of with a direction to the 'fti^ci'^i 'sw^ ^ 'f^st <r^^H ii'aifOTsii^i made above, this petition is finally •espondent authorities to consider and decide the olaim of the petitioner f(>r grant of two advance increments as per circular dated 21-09-1974 issijied by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verifcation ofthe faots pleadejd in the petition within a period of ejght weeks from today. — - SdA Manindra Mohan Shrivastava - Judge