in subsequent cases, i.e., Writ Petition (3.) No.41 30 of 2005 (Gopesh ‘Kumar Velma vs. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh and another) and other connected matters, decided by this Court on 15-1 2-2006, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S1 No. 3617 of 2007 PETlTi0NERS 1. Nand Kishor Gilhare, Age about 36 year, Agtt. Teacher, S/o Shri Charan Das Gilhare, Primary Schooi, Khamtari, Block- Arang, Distt.-Raipur (6.5.) 2. Indra Prasad Bandhe, Age about 43 year, Astt. Teacher, S/o shri Dada Ram Bandhe. Primary School, Parssthi, Block- Arang, Distt.—Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh, Through Secretary, Triba! Welfare Department & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Distt.-Raipur (C.G.) 2. Distt. Education Officer, Raipur, District- Raipur (C.G.) 3. Biock Education Officer, Arang. District— Raipur (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Single Bench : Hon‘bie Mr. Justice Satish K. Agnihotri Present: Shri Somkant Verma, Advocate for the petitioners. \v Smt. Anju Ahuja, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State l respondents. ORDER (Passed on 27‘ i day of June, 2007) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as for the State/respondents jointiy submit that the fact and question of Iaw invoived in the present writ petition are the same to that of in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}, which has been disposed of vide order dated 03.04.2006. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not controvert the said submission. pursuant to the memo dated 28-1-1995, issued by the Seei'etary, Board of Secondary Education, Bhopal and the prospectus of Diploma in Education Examination, it was clarified that the nomenclature of the Basic Training institute, i.e., B.T.l. has been changed and renamed as Diploma in Education. i.e., D.Ed. Accordingly, the D.Ed. Certificate holders are also covered by the decision in Writ Petition (5.) No.4130 of 2005 (Gopesh Kumar Verma vs. The State Govt. of Chhattisgarh, and another) (Supra). Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the order passed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Durg and another (Supra), subject to verification of the fact as to whether the petitioners have acquired D.Ed. Examination Certificates on their own expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 and 01.03.1999 and further whether they have been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to costs. l Sd/— l Satish K.Agnihotra a z Judge