. .Mé).3é£[? mm A H1200 mm (Wu) mmfww mmm WW wW mmm %aifaum ‘ W.P. S No.362l2003 PETITIONERS 1. Dr. KR. Sahu, S/o ShriJhadu Ram Sahu, aged 49 years, Assistant Professor 2. Alok Dixit, S/o Shri K,L. Dixit, aged 5O years, Assistant Professor 3. Dr. S.K. Gupta, S/o Late Shri Baijnath ged about 48 yeam, Assistant Prasa ngh, aged 46 yeam, Assistant 5. Dr. .K. Shn'vastava, S/o Late Shri D.N. Prad nha, aged 46 years, Assistant u ears, Pmfessor Asha Kaushik, Wlo Dr. R.K. aged about 55 years, Pmfessor Kher, S/o Late Shn' S.V. Kher, A aged 48 Years, Professor All workng at Government Science post Graduate College, V Bilaspur, District BilaspurCG) Vs RESPONDENTs 1. State of Chhattisgarh, thmugh Secretary Deparun nt of Higher Education, D.K.S. Bhawan, Mantralaya Raipur, District Raipur ) ioner, Directorate Higher Educati Government Science Colleg Campus aipur, District Raipur (CG) /-, ' (Petin‘on U/A 226 of Constituu'on oflndia) / t. @ a d i D as i .( ( ( G ' s o e @ ’ XI—HC—7 8 mm.. 111200 WWW (Kama) . mmfaia? mmm WWWWW WWW ,2/ $aifamm Sige Bench; Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dhirendra Misha 27.01.2009 Shri Manoj Chouhan, oo . sel for the petitioners. Shri M.P.S. Bhatia, y Govt. Advocate for the State] mspondents. Heald. The petitioners are wor given two advance incxeme ts for undergoing family planning . rules of Annexure P-l. However, While Fixing their salary as per ecommendation of 5th Pay Commission, the two advance increments been taken into consideration} Learned counsel for th petitioners submits that the issue involved in this matter has bee finally settled by the Madhya Pradesh Administrative Tribunal vide o er dated 7. 12.2000 passed in Original Application No.437/ 2000 in th matter of Smt. Smn'ti Chakravarti Vs. The State of MP. and ojhers- also by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh vide order dated ‘ th March 2004 passed in W.P. No.6074/2003 in the matter of Dr. Anand Samph Vs. State of MP. He further submits that he is under the respondents. They were ‘ g operation as per nxation of s ‘ady given to the petitioners, have not however, he prays for lib n mpresentation before the res ondent No.1 for redressal of above grievances, who may be iinthe directed to decide the same mirage pressing this petition at this stage, to the petitioners to me suitable /’/, d 6 e XI—HC 78 WWWW I 111200 mmcmaw , mm fs€tW $3i1=rm311€$ WWW ’wmm mmm 5tg, specified pen'od in the light Smt Smritz' Chakravayii (supra) On the other hand, learn the petitioners me nesh repres redressal of above gn'evances along With copy of this order, 1'11 by the respondent No.1, in a period of 8 weeks h'om the date In view of the above s parties, this petition is dispose hesh representation befoxe the grievances, within a period of o: this order. On such representa shall decide the same within of the. judgnents in the mattem of Dr, Anand Saraph (supra). d counsel for the State submits that if tation before the respondent No. 1 for thin a period of one week from today same shall be considered and decided cordance with law, Within a further f receipt of the representation. bmission of learned counsel for the of with liberty to the petitioners to me irespondent No. 1 for redressal of above 1e week hem today along with copy of tion being made the respondent No.1 receipt of the representah'on in a L penod of 8 weeks h‘om the date of F. V Sd/— Dhirendra Mishra Judge /' ; ccordance w1th law z WW : i ‘