S&Vi -S'J IN THE HICH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CC) WRIT PETITION (S) N0. 5-^"70 /2006 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE PETITIONER * RESPONDENTS ,^ek -py^ '^y ^l^ / o- CONSTITUTION OF INDLA, Dadu Ram Patel, aged about 57^ years, son of Shri Heera Lal Patel, Head Master - covernment Tribal Middle school - Kilkila, Tah. patthaigaon, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. state of Chhattisgarh, through ^ Secretary, Department of Tribal welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner, Department^ of Tribal Welfare, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner,/" Department of Tribal wetfare, District jashpur Nagar (C.G.) 4. The Block Education Officer, Block/ Patthalgaon, District jashpur (C.G.) The petitioner, named above, respectfully submits as ^' under:- r KC6H COURT OF CHHATTES6ARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (s) No. S481 of 2006 Petitioner : BaijNath Prasad Nand Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh A others Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W. P. fe) No. 5484 of 2006 Shyam Bandhu Patel Versus State of Chhatt'isgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 5485 of 2006 Bohadur Singh Sidar Versus Stateof ChhirM'isgarh & others W. P.fslNo. 5487 of 2006 Devktl Kurre Versus State of Chhatt'isgarh & o+hers W. P. fe) No. 5488 of 2006 Petitioner : Atma Ram Rao Versus Respondents : State of Chhattisgarh A others Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents W. P. (s) No. 5489 of 2006 Sunil Shrivastava Versus State of Chhattisgarh & others W. P. (s) No. 5490 of 2006 Dadu Ram Patel Versus State of Chhatt'isgarh & others And W. P. (s) No. 5491 of 2006 Petitioner : 5unum Kumar Kujur Versus Respondents : State of Chhatt-isgarh & o-thers C^) 1 Single Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri. Shri A. N. Bhakta, Advocate for the Petitioners. 5hri Sumesh Bajaj, 6ovt. Advocate for the respondents/State. ORDER (10th October, 2006) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that while working as Assistant Teachers/Upper Division Teachers, the petitioners havegone on training to improve their qualifications on their own expenses and acquired B.Ed./B.T.I Examination Certificates. 2. The present writ petitions, being W.P.(s) Nos. 5481/2006, 5484/2006, 5485/2006, 5487/2006, 5488/2006, 5489/20)6, 5490/2006 and 5491/2006 involve similar facts and common question of bw. 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 thedecision of this Court in the case of Yoshwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation. burg <md cmother {2006 CCT) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the ccise of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and onother (Supra), came to the conclusion that the teachers. who had obtained B. Ed./B.TJ. Examination c^ ^^ Cert'ifica-te on his own expenses, are covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 isajed by the 5tn-te Sovemment of Madhya Pradesh. 4. Leamed coun%l for -fhe petitioners further submits that the facts and question of law involved in +he present cases are squarely covared by decision of this Court in the case of Ycshwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipat Corporotion, Ourg dnd another (Supra), to which .learned counsel oppearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees wfth the averment made by leamed counsel dppearing for the petitioners. 5. Accordingty, •the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yoshwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corponrt'ion, Durg and oaio-fher (Supro), subject to verification of the fact as to whether •the petitioners have acquired B. Ed./B.T.!. Examination Certificates on their own expenses or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- SatishK.Agnaiotri Judge Boblu