HIGH COURT OF CHHATTCSGARH AT BILA8PVR S.B. : HON'BLEMR.SATISHK.AGNIHOTIU.J. WRIT PETITION (S) No. 1503 of 200% PETITIONERS Digeram Khare, aged about 45 years, S/o Shri Batatrua Khare, R/0. Kosir, P.0. Kosir, Tafasil : Sarangarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENT8 1. State of Chhattisgarii. tfu-ough Secretaiy, School Educatioa Department, Maatralaya at D.K.S. Bhawas, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Director, Directorate of Public Instroction, PensioBbada, Raipur (C.G.) 3, Assitt. CommissioBer, Development of Tribal, Distt. : Jashpur. (C.G.) 4. Joiat Director, Treasury & Accounts, Raipur (C.G.) Present: Shri Ajit Singh, Advocate for Ihe petitioaer. Shri Vinay Pandey, Panel Lawyer for tito State/responctents. ORDER (Passed on 14m Marcfa 2007) 1. Leamed counsel ai^earing for the petitioncr submits 1:hat Ae petitioner is working as Assistaat Teaeher. The petitioaer obtained B.Ed. Examination certificate on 20.12.1996, oa his own expenses. r- 1 -SSa! 2. Learaed counsel appeariag for tiie petitioner submfts that the question involved, herein asto whether the teacher, who obtained B.Ed. Exaaination CCTtificate on his own expenses, is entitled to two advance inerements. 3. Acoording to leamed counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner is eatilled to two advance increments in view offhe decision oftbis Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Munrcipal Corporation, Durg and anoAer {2006 (II) MPJR- CG 96}. This Court, in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs, Municipal Corporation, Duig and another (Supra), came to the conclusion tiiat Ae teachers, who had obtained B.Ed. /B.T.I. Examination Certificate on their own expenses, ara covered by the circular dated 24.12.98 issued by the State G<weramait of 4. Learaed counsel for the petitioneg- fitrther submits that the facts and question of law inwlved m the present cas®are scpaarely covered by decision of this Court in the case of Yastowmrt Kumar Kiaradwaj Vs. Muniupal Corporatfam, Durg airi anoflier (Supm), to which leamed counsel appearing for the respondents fairly concedes and agrees with the avennent made by leamed counsel appeariag for the petitioner. 5. Awordingly; the writ petition is allowed in tenas of Ifae wder pa^ed in the case of Yashwant Kumar Miaradwaj Vs. o) Mumdpal Corpora<ion, Durg nnd anolhea- (Supra), mbjeet to verification ofthe fact as to whether the petitioner has ftcquired B.Ed. Examiaation Certifieate on his OWB expenses as per the circulars dated 24.12.1998 & 1 .3.1999 md fiuther whether he has been paid two advance increments or not. No order as to casts. ... !. : Sd/- ^:;- Satish KAgnihotri , Jydge '; „ Amit ^-'