@ WWLE ENw g (.F‘ ”dz: IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S} No. WA“ OF 2010. PETITIONER : Seva Ram Dhankar, S/o. Shri Jagat Ram Dhankar, aged about 47 years, Lecturer, Govt. High School Kolar, Block Abhanpur, District Raipur (c. G.) VE RSUS :1.’ State Qf Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C. G.) / 2f District Education Officer, Raipur, Distt, Raipur, (C.G.) 3. “Block Education Officer, Abhanpur, Distt, Raipur, (C.G.) a? 4. Treasury Officer, Treasury Account and Pension, Raipur, Distt, Raipur, (C.G.) PTITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE ONSTITUTION OF INDIA RESPONDENTS WRIT E C Seva Ram Dhankar. : HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETlTlON (S) No. 1341 of2010 PETlTiONER VERSUS RESPONDENTS : S‘Iate of Chhattisgarh & Others. Writ Petition Under Alticle 226 Of The Constitutian Of India SB: Hon’b!e Shri Satish K. Agnihnhi .I Present Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri P. K Bhaduri, Panel Lawyer for the Sate/respondents. ORDER ORAL (Passed on 30 day of March, 2010) With the consent of teamed counsei for the parties, the matter is heard finally. t. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments on passing of B.Ed. examination, on his own expenses, before entering into service. 2. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res infegra as the same has be'en considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena V, sate ofMP. & Ors.’ as well as by this Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bhaiadwej V. Municipal Corporaztbn, Burg & enema/2 and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The Swte Govt of Chham’sganlr andanother? . 3 Learned counsei further submits that the instant petition is squarely covered by the decision as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation to the respondent authorities to decide his case for grant of two increments in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verification of the fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.Ed. certificate on his own expenses before entering into service. 4. Leamed counsei appearing for the State/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a represenmtion, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law and in the light of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena (sup/a) as weil as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bhaladwaj and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. in View of foregoing, according to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adiudication. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of t I 1 2009 (In) MFJR (so) 59 2 2006 (It) MPJR—CG 96 3 WP(S) No. 4130 of2005 .