d^-l^Z < IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S) No. / '^ / 2011 PETITIONER Kuber Ram Deshmukh S/o Shri Budhe Lal Deshmukh, Aged about 40 years, Occupation - Upper Division Teacher, Govt. H. Sec. School Kohka Bhilai Distt. Durg (CG). VERSUS RESPONDENTS ^..._/1'"1 r^y^A- .^v.-^^--"" 4",^\.^--nf0>'' ^'•.\yv''l'J" Q--- 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through - The Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Joint Director, Accounts, Treasury and Pension, Raipur ,(C.G.) 3. District Education Officer District Durg (CG) RIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE COJ4STITUTION OF INDIA ^^•'\ •s^' '<•>.. '^5® ^'^s^^.•^ 3^^; HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILA8PUR PETmONER WMTPETmON(S) No.742of20U : Kuber Ram Deshmukh. VERSUS RESPONDENT8 : State ofCUiattisgaA & Oihers. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITU'nON OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Aenibotri. J. Present: Shr Vipin Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri Sushil Dubey, Govenunent Advoeate forthe State/respondents. ORDER(ORAL1 (Passedon 08B1 dayof Febmary,2011) 1. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner subarits that the petitioner is entitled to benefit of two advance increments on account ofthe fact that the petitioner has passed B.Ed. exammation before eiitering into the serviee, at his own cost. It is subnutted that fhe issue involved in the present petition is no longer res integra andthe same bas been finally settled bythe Supreme Coiirt mAsha Saxena v. StateofM-P. & Ors. as well as by this Court in the matter of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, Diirg and anofher/ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State G<wt. ofChhattisgarh cmd another^ . 2. It is further submitted that tiiis Coiirt has also taken a smrilar view in its order dated 6-2-2009 passed in W.P. (S) No.6257 of3008. Leamed counsel further submits that the order dated,29-4-2010 12009CD!I)MP]R(SC)59 22006(II)MPJRCG96 3WP(SjNo.4130of2005 "-• '<tt ~?'.;.'SS:V39- K ^\ 4. passed in W.A.NO.124 of2009, wherein relying upcm tiiejudpneiit ofthe Supreme Court mAsha Saxena (supra) and the order passed by this Court in another W.A.No.87/2009, directions have been issued for consideration of the case for grant of two advance increments as par the eircular dated 21-9-1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh, after verification of the facts pleaded in the petition. Leamed counsel appearing for the State/respondents subnuts that the case of Ifae petitioner would also be considCTed on the same lines. In view ofthe above, the petition is disposed ofwith a direction to the respondent authorities to eonsider and decide the elaim oflfae petitioner for graat oftwo advance increments in the U^it oftiie orders passed in the above-referred cases, after verificatioa offhe facts, pleaded in the petition, withm a period of 8 weefcs from today. Sd/- SatishK.Agnihot Judge n