/t '•'")• IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR fC.G.1 WRIT PETITION (S) N0. -^^ °)^- /2010 PETITIONERS ^;: "^ ^" ."\^ )^^'.- ^.r^?-y:/'\ ,(^A€4^ €^y ^"./<^ l.Preni Chand Dewangan S/o Pareshwar Prasad, Aged-about 39 years, Upper division teacher, Government High school, Barpali, Champa, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa [C.G.] 2. Smt. Carmela Xaxa W/o D.K.Xaxa Aged-about 48 years, Lecturer, Government High School, Champa, Distt.- Janjgir-Champa [C.G.] 3. Deonanda Patwa S/o Shivram Patwa Aged-about 46 years, Lecturer, Government Boys High school, Champa, Distt.- Janjgir Champa [C.G.] VERSUS ^. -^^ s^. '^ \^^^^ RESPONDENTS l.State Of Chhatdsgarh Through- Secretaiy, School Education Department, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] 2. Director, Public Insti-uction, Government Of Chhattisagarh, Raipur [C.G.] S.District Educadon Officer, Swami Vivekanand Marg, Main Road, Janjgir, Distt.-Janjgir-ChampafC.G.j WRIT PETITION UNDER_ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT. ORDER OR DIRECTIONS . The above named petitioners most humbly and respectfully begs to submit as under: ^aET "?5^pn^prT, ^Ti1^^i(o, I^RTray .^...^..e^-).^^ '^^sr' ^INdl ^W^ 3TT^T^[ f<rii.<=h 3T[^T 5^^ich 'Mf^a T ^TT^T'^RTTS[R ^rftTT S.B.: HOi?l'yBLB JUSTICB MR. PRI- 16.-12-2010 Shri D.R.Patel, counsel for t^ Shri Suinesli Bajaj, G.A. for Coiin.sel for the petitioners ^ are entitled to benefit of two advank they ha.ving, passed B.T,I. exaram.alp at their own cost. It is subniitted t.t present petitiou is ua longer res in^i fsixally decided by ihe Hon.?bl.e Su| Asha Baxena Vs. State of M.P. 59. pe'titioners. t|ie State. • mbmits tfaat tlxe petitioners ^e iacremen.ts on accouB.t of ion 'before fheir appomtment liat flie issue nivolved m. the in^egra aa.d the saine h.as been brcme Court in. fh.e case of Ors. 2009 (IIS.1MPJR (SC| lotier It is further subixiitted that similar view in. its order dated 6.21 6257/2008. Counsel for the petitiotis order dated 29.4.2010 passed ia wh.erein. relyiB.g upon fh.e jiidgment| case ofAsha Saxena (supra) and tl^e ta another Writ Appeal No. 87 f^ issiied for consideratiou of the cafe( mcrexiients as per circular dated 2 of Madhya Pradesh., aiter veidfi.catio|ri petition. Counsel for fhe State submiN Iwould ai.so be considered on the saib.e .1_.. <=hl<LJ?d41v< iTF^f ^ f^Tst <f^^l< ^T 3Tf^TH'STT^T •INKER DIWAK.BR this Court has also taken a ,2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. fijrth.er submits tb.a.t tlie Wnt Appeal N0. 124/2009, of tbe Suprcnie Coizrt iii tlie ,e order passed by this Court. ?!009, directions have been ^e for graiit of two advaace ..9.1974 issued by the State of fhe facts pleaded m, fhe fhat case of tlie petitio.ners Imes. T H.L^ [^•^ ,-^':E^-, '% v%; XI-HC-22 ry .^' ~S^ '^IPTT^PT, ^Tl1^4t<o, fG«r11<Hy 3^?T 1c?^? ^IHC-II 5b^ieh* •M 200 •1^^" 3TT^T"^T r^iph 371^1 5b^i<^ ^f^a S^T'^TT^R ^Tf^T In view of above, fhe pet^ directioii to the respondent autho^l petitioners for grant of 1'^vo advaii<|' dated 21.9.1974 issiied by the S^ verificatioii of the fa.ct.s p.1eaded iii eight weeks froni today, It is raade clear th.at this opiiiion on Bierits of fb-e case ai} would be a.t libeity to deci.de thei witb. law. tton is disposed of witli a ties to decide the claiin of the s iiicrenients as per cii'eiilar ^te of Madhya Pradesh after he petition withij:! a period of (^ourt- faas not expressed aiiy id the au.th.ori.t.Y -conceiTicd j sa.m.e ' strictly in. accoi'dao.ce chl^id41r1 TTR^f ^ 'ft1^ <p3i^l< ^srf^m^^T Sd/- Pritinker Diwaker Judge ..^1-. ^ [^rte '^^