^ W THE HIGH COURT OP CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR Wnt P&tition IS) No, 1287 ot2009 Petitioner Versus Respondents 1, 2. 3. 4. Ajay Mahapatra, age about 41 year, S/o Shri D. B. Mahapatra, Govt. Hr. Sec. School Lakhanpuri, Kanker, Distt - Kanker (C.G,) State Govt. of Chliattisgarh, tiirough fhe Secretary, Education Departm.ent, D.K.S, Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) The Distt. Education Officer, Kanker, Distt - Kanker (C.G.) Block Education Ofiicer, Kanker, Distt. - Kanker (C.G.) Treasu^ Account & Peusioii, Kaiiker, Distt. Kanker (C.G.) WRIT PI'ITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OFTHE CONSTITUTION OF WDIA (SB: Hon'ble Sbri Satish K. Agnihotii J.) Shri Somlcant Veraia, Advocate for the petitioner. Yashwant Sio.gh Thakur, Deputy Advocate General for fhe respondents/ State. OR D E R (Passed on this 23rd day of March, 2009) 1. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties, the matter is heard ImaULy, 2. Learaed counsel appeadng for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entifled to grant of two iiicrenients as he has obtained D.Ed. certi&cate on his own expenses diuing the service period. Learned counsel further submits that fhe petitioner inay be granted Uberty to inake a representation to the authorities for graiit of two iacreiaents pursuaat to the judgment aad order passed by this Court m the matter of Yc^shiuani Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal CorporatiorL Durg 6? 3. 6. and another1 aad W.P.(S.) No. 4130 of 2005, Gopesh Kvmar Vermavs, The State Govt of Chtiattisgarh and another On 4,3.2009, in spite of the opportunity grajated to the State/respondents, ou their request, to flle response, no allidavit is filed, The State Govenunent is under aa obUgation to follow the law settled by this Court and it is not necessary to approach this Court by each and eveiy eniployee when the law ha.s akeady been settled by this Court. The einployees, who are sitmlarly situated aad have not approached the Court, inay be treated at par with other eniployees, who have approacfaed this Court. It is not necessaiy to approach this Court for siinilar order, In view ofthe loregoiug reasons, this petition staads disposed of with Mberty reser^ed to the petitioner, on the request of learned couusel, to xaake a representation, If the representaUon is flled by the petitioner, the same xiiay be considered aad decided, ia accordance with law on its own raerit as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks frora fhe date ofreceipt ofthe representation. Consequently, pendmg appUcations, if any, staad disposed of Thakur Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge 12006(11) MPJR-CG 96