XI-HC-78 E W , W , W W . / ..;;S.2...éi¥.3.£. a1 2006: WW (W) WW§WW mwanw %31%w3n%$r mam wmm 11.12.2006: Shri AN. Bhakta counsel for t Shri Anju Aahuja, GA for the r spon denUState. Petitioner is working as Teach r in a Government School. In the course of her service as Teacher. she has obi ned B.T.i. certiiicate at her ovirn expenses before 1 .31999‘ According to learn ed counsel the petitioner, petitioner is entitled to two advance increments in View of the de ision of this Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal ration, Durg and another reported in 2006 (2) MPJR —- CG 96 wherein i has been held that the teachers having obtained B.Ed., M‘Ed“ BTI certiticate at their own expenses are covered by the circular dated 24.12.1998 issued by State Government oflliladhya Pradesh. Further in the matter of Smt. norama Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. and others reported in 2000 () MPLSR 136, the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal, Gwalior Be ch while considering the circular dated 1.3.1999 wherein it is provided tha the teachers who have acquired B,Ed. degree at their own cost between 2 1.0.1954 and 7.5.1973 shall be entitled to two advance increments, relied on t e decision in the case of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastava Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and others passed in Original Application No. 163211999 decided o 12.10.1999 wherein it is observed that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be de applicable retrospectively. Thus, a teacher may be Assistant Teacher, who has obtained B.Ed. degree before 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advanced i crements. lt is pointed out by the learne counsel appearing for the petitioner that the then state of Madhya Pradesh ha tiled a Special Leave Petition against the orders passed by the Tribunal and e Hon’ble Supreme Court disrnissedithe r c o t a a XI—HC-78 E W , W , W ~ C91”:§f".’...é.?.?.é.... WWW @ W $ I m WWW mwm a 200 é Wm (13W) WW§WW ‘ - %31%tran%¥r - Special Leave Petition No. 1999124100 med against the order of the tribunal. Therefore, the direction to the eiTeci that the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable retrospectively, paslsed by the Tribunal. becomes linal and the , same shall be applicable to all the Assistant Teachers; who have obtained B.Ed.iBTl certilicates before 1.3.1939. It is further substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State of Madhya Pradesh wherein the circular clearly states about the decis Learned cdunsel for the petitioner further submits that the facts and question of law involved in the prese the decision of this Court in the cas which learned counsel appearing f agrees with the averments made by l Accordingly, the writ petition Court in the matter of Yashwant Ku‘ fact as to whether the petitioner l expenses as per the circular dated 2 she has been paid two advance incre l Sd/- ion ofthe Hon’ble Supreme Court. t case of petitioner are squarely covered by of Yashwant Kumar BharadWaj (supra) to the respondent/State fairly concedes and earned counsel appearing for the petitioner. is allowed in terms of the decision of this imr Bharadwaj subject to verification of the tas acquired B.T.l. certiticate at her own 4.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further whether ments or not. No order as to cost b ‘ Dhirendra Mishl‘a l Judge P.T.O.