c^- \i @ S.B. (Service Matter) IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR fCHHATTISGARH) WRIT PETITION (S) NO.F S-S3 /2011. L PETITIONER: Shatruhan Lal Verma, son of Budram Verma, aged about 52 years, working as Upper Division teacher,5iou^- 'MsVw i&coyiAyy SoteoJ Sa-baf District Baloda Bazar (Education), Raipur, Chhattisgarh. versus '"s^ssyv: Respondents »^^tv -^s^^ ?.-\^^-'\/?'..y'"' ^y^ ^--",B.< ,.- ^•'.^ ..-•" "S'E'ttSI*- ir State of Chhatdsgarh, Through Secretaiy, Education Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. fDistrict Education Officer, Baloda Bazar, Chhattisgarh. 3.''Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur, District Raipur, C.G. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2260F THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PARTICULARS OFTHE PETITIONER: As mentioned in the Cause title. PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS: As inentioned in the Cause title. PARTICULARS OF THE CAUSE/ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE PETITION IS MADE/ SUBJECT MATTER IN BRIEF. The petitioner is not challenging any particular order, but the petitioner has aggrieved by the act pf the respondents. The petitioner is working as Upper •• fsa ^s ES?^ B BS3 B •• 818 K' sss ashok PETITIONER HIGHGOURT OR CHHATnSGWiH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S^ N0. 1359 OF 2011 StetruhanLal Verma RESPONDENTS Versus State of Chhaffisgarh & Others (Writ Pet'rtion underArticte 226ofthe Constthrtion of India) Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri SaUsh K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Shri C-Jayant K. Rao, Advocato for the petidoner, , Shri Y.S.Thakur, Dy. Advocate Genera! for the State/ respondents. ORDERfORAU (Passed on this 14BI day ofMarch, 2011) Heard learned counse! for the parties. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled to benefrt oiftwo advance incrementson account of having passed B.T.I. examination in theyear 1979 before his appointment i.e. on 11.01.1980,at hisown cost. It is submitted Uiatlhe issae involved in the present petition is no longer res/rtegra, as ttie same has been fhally decided by theSupremeCourt in4s^a59W"av Sfafe^MP.&Ora. . It isfurther submitted ttatttiis Court hasatsotaken a simterview in its order dated 6-2-2009 passed in W.P. (S) No.6257 of 2008. Leamed counsel further submte that the order dated 29-4-2010 passed in W.A.No.124 of2009, wherein relying upon thejudgmentofttie Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) and the orcter psssed by this Court in another WANo.87 of 2009, directions have been issired for eonsideration of the case for grant of two advance increments as pw the circular dated 21-9-1974 issuedbythe State of Madhya Rradesh, after verifiiisation ofthefacts pleaded in the petition. Leamed counsel appearing for the Statesubmits ttiat the case af the Detitioner would atso be considered on the same lines. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of with a dtrection to the respondentauthQrities to dacide the claim of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments, as per the cfrcular dated 21-9-1974, issued t»y the State of Madhya Pradesh after verification of the facts pleaded in the petition within a period of8 weeks from today. Satts Sd/- . ,_: ^^A^ot7i judge 1 2009 (III) MPJR(SC)S9 i&i; 3S