smaLE' m3“ 1 CD. /§ g Cg (372— : IN THE.HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITIONJS) NOLIRHj OF 201 1 PETITIONER (/‘Bhaghali Rai S/o Shri Kunj Bihari Raj; aged about 41 years, Working Upper Division Teacher, Govt. Middle School Shaila, Block Pali, Distt. v Korba (C.G.) VERSUS ‘ Chhattisgarh, Through Secretaiy Tribal Welfare Department D K.S. .Bhawan Raipur (C G ) Comm1ss1oner, Trlbal Welfare ’Department, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (CG) ' Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Korba, Distt. Korba (CG) Joint Directo, Treasury, accounts, pension, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (C.G.) 5_ Block Education Officer Pali, of, 1 . State Distt. Korba (CG) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA The petmoner most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under — l. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER: x RESPONDEKITS r f XI-HC 78 3a WW, @émway,m . wC/‘wwwgtgkzoo ‘ L . R WWW cmTch 33‘ Fae“! (Tm a; aim aim .3.: HON’BLE MR. JUSTIC PRITINKER DIWAKER 03.08.201 1 uTIRWTWW" m W (iai‘i’aia) r mam mam 8 mmraw 1U ammmi'ch‘ Shn' Amit Kumar, coun e1 for the pctitioner. Shri N.Naha Roy, P.L. f r the Stats. Counsel for thc pctitio er submits that the petitioner entitled to benem of two adb ce increments on account of he having passed B.T.I. examin tion in the yeaf 1993 before his \o appoinmgcnt at his own cos . It is submitted that the issue involved in the present pch‘ti is no longer res integra and the 2, s same has been dnally decide by the Hon’ble Supxeme Court in M the case of Asha Saxena . State of M.P. 85 Ors. 2009 g (HHMPJR (SC) 59. It is fLuther submitted at this Comt has also taken similar View in its order date 6.2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. ; 6257/2068. Counsel for the petitioners further submits that the order dated 29.4.201 passed in Wn‘t Appeal ‘No. 124/ 2009, wherein relying u on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case ofAsha S na (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another Wli Appeal No. 87/2009, directions l H N have been issued for conside tion of the case for grant of two advance increments as per c‘ ular dated 21.9.1974 issued by the State of Madhya Prades , after ven‘iication of the facts pleaded in the petition. Counsel for the State su mits that case of the petitioner would also be considered on e same hnes XI-HC 78 3a WW, Wang, WW “mmWW Ia zoo m m Rafi-awn) mwm‘ wmm mmam In View of above, the direction to the mspondent aui the petitioner for grant of tw‘ circular dated 21.9.1974 issu Pradesh after ven£cation of th‘ within a period of four months It is made clsar that this opinion on marits of the case would be at libexty to decide t] with law. wwiwfm Timef 13 Feta? I’m éwifananéw tition is disposed of With a horities to decide the claim of ) advance increments as per .ed by the State of Madhya : facts pleaded in the petition ~om today. Court has not expxessed any and the authority concerned 1e same strictlv in accordance f Sd/v- Pritinker Diwaker Judge w—v—g