INGLE BENC1 .-...->. IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (GG) WRIT PETITION (S) N0.6S&4-/2006 WRIT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, / Khemraj Ezardar (B.T.I./B.T.C.), aged about 44 years, Son of Shri Bhawar Singh Ezardar, Assistant Teacher, Government Primary School Sahajpali, Vikas Khand Baramkela, District Raigarh (CG) VERSUS PETITIONER RESPONDENTS /:.1 ^y ^ ^.*1*^" ^^ .."•' 'v7.;-"^' 5.--"^ \y'"' ...--'-....-•"l.\\-l'; ,$y'n^-;'' .: ••'^j'r t^v.,'-'' ^'-- 3. State of Chhattisgarh, through - Secretary, Department of School Education, Dau Kalyan Singh-Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) District Education Officer, Raigarh (CG) Block Education Officer, Block Baramkela, Distt. Raigarh (CG) XI-HC-78 3?? '<<i<<in<i, aTnu'is, ^_^^.L^-^<>- *(i*iwi sb*f|ch ••••••••••••••••••••• ^fq- 200 ^ (?6 ^ Sii^i 4a<»i('^3^?T) aii^r ^iT R-<i* tmraii^i stiHi'* CTBTWdfersn^T *i'iifd'!fl-) ii*i<iT fffs<fi tRi^it ^'srf^R'sn^r 11.12.200e Shri A.N. Bhakta, ooinsel fbr fie Smt. Anju Ahuja, G.A. for the The petitioner is working a|s School. !n the course of his service a|s obtained B. T.1. certificats at his own According to learned counsel two advance increments in view of tfte Yashwant Kumar Bharaciwai Vs.l petitioner. (esponcfents/State. a|s Assistant Teactier in Government Assistant Teacher, the petitioner has e^tpenses before 1.3.1899. (ar the petitioner, petitioner is aTtitfed to deeision of this Court in the case of MunlciBal corDoratlon. Durfl^AOd another reDorted in 2006 S) MPJR - C©96. This Court in the ease of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Mu)iiclpal (supra), came to the conclusion tt])at B.Ed./B.T.I. BominationCertificateoh the circular dated 24.12.1998 lssuec( Practesh. Furttier in the matter of Smt 1 Corporation, Dutg and another the teachers, who had obtamed their own expenses, are covered by by the State Govemment of Madhya Manorama Shrirasta»aVs. State ef M.P. and others reported in 2000 flt) MPLSR •t38, the Madhya Pradesh th* cfcist AdminislTaitive Tribunal, Gwalior Beni| 1.3.1599 wherein it is provided acquired B.Ed. degree at their own shall be entitled to two advance incl case of Rakesh Kumar Shrivastav^ others passed in Orginal Application wherein it is observed that the cire)jlar applicabte retrospectively. Thus, a has obtained B.Ed. degree before increments. |t) white considering the circuiar dated the Assistart Teachers who have behween 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 (ements, relied on the decjsion in the Vs. State of Madhya Practesh and hlo. 1632/1999 decided on 12.10.1999 dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made may be Assistart Teaoher, who 1.3.1999 is erititted to two advanced tefecher P.T.O. l^ XI-HC-78 *11*1WI Sb*11<h 3?g'^frai?RT, »'rfl*f'is,Riciiyy ^^.^:^^ Sll^l l^tti (l^fgS^) sn^rqirf^iw clsrTa^Tai*i ??(IRRHfeT3II^T dismissed the Special Leave Petitionl of the tribunai. Therefore, the directii «hi''ifi'<<fl-it<it)ciTfffW'<Ri^i< ^ari^rsn^r It is pointed aut by the learn^d counsei appearirg for the petitioner that the then State of Madhya Prad^sh had fited a Special Leave Petitton against the orders passed by the Tri|?unal and the Hontole Supreme Ccurt No. 1999fl000 filed against the order in to the effect ttiat the cireular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be made applicable (etrospectively, passed t>y the Tribunal, becomes final and the same sha( be applicabte to all the Assistant Teachers, who have obtained B.Ed.|BTI certfficates before 1.3.1999. It is further substantiated by a cireular d^ State of Madhya Pradesh wherein decision ofthe Hon'bte Supreme Cou(t. Learned counsel for the petitji mer further submits that the facts and question of law involved in the pr^sent case of petitioner are squarely covered by the decision of this Ccfurt in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj (supraj to which le^rned counsel appearirg for the respondent/State fairiy concedes an^ learned counsel appearir^ for the pet] Accordingly, the writ petition| this Court in the matter ofYashwant H ited 17.10.2303 issued by the present the ciroular eieariy states about the aQfees with the averments made by tioner. is allowed in terms of the decision of :uamr Bharadwaj subject to verificatlon of the fact as to whether the petition^r has acquired B.T.1. certfficate at his own expenses as per the cireular dat^d 24.12.1998 and 1.3.19S9 and iurther whether he has been f»idtwo advafice inorements or not. No order as to costs. Sd/- Dhu-endra Mishra Judge P.T.O.