y Slngl®Bench IN THE HON'BL E HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT W.P. (S)NO....i$p..?.\................2011 PETITIONER ^;?! -S^SM+:--"""'" ^ "<9l..^^V:I ,s^ .v.i .^" Smt Sarita Vaidya w/o Shri Santosh kumar Vaidya aged about 45 year, U.D.T Middle School Dabrapali Bhilai -3 District Durg(C.G.) State of Chattishgsrh Through Secretary Education Department D.K.S Bhawan Raipur (C.G) 2. District Education officer Dur{ li.lii HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR SINGLE BENCH : HON'BLE SHRI PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA. J. W.P.?SlNo. 2021 of 2011 PETITIONER Smt. Sarita Vaidya. Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh and another. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 22S OF THE CQNSTITUTION OF 1NDIA. Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for petitioner. Shri Satish Gupta, Govt. Advocate for the SSate. QRAL ORDER (• Following oral order of the Court was passed by Prashant Kumar Mishra. J. Heard. (2) By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of passing of B. Ed. Examination, on their own expenses, during her service period. (3) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra, as the same has been consldered and decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Asha Saxena vs. State ofM.P. & Ors., reported in 2009 (II!) MPJR (SC) 59 as well as by this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj vs. Municipai Corporation, rg and another reported in 2006 (II) MPJR -CG 96 and Gopesh Kumar Verma vs. The State Govt. ofChha sgarhandanotherin WP(S) No. 4310 of (4) Learned counsel 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 decide her case in the light of aforestated decisions, subject to verification of the facts as to whether the ^petitioner has acquired B. Ed. certificate on her own expenses during the course of her service. 2-- (5) Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representation, the same will be considered and decided, in accordance with law in the light of decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (supra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bhardwaj (supra) and Gopesh Kumar Verma (supra), within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the representation. (6) In view of foregoing, according to thelearned counset appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition for adjudication. (7) Accordingty, the writ petition is disposed of. 3S'' x&' '^l'^>^1 ^^' ^'^e y^ !<1| !i!i f8H