'.iS='S^%aFi IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR (CG) WRIT PETITION (S) N0. S^S^. /2006 WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE PETITIONER CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, Awdhesh Kumar Tiwari (B.Ed.), aged ^ , Sftl lal-e. R-<;h,-3].jq'7'Tl<>^a'T about 56 years,! Upper Division ^eacher, Government (Tribal) Higher ].$tfe?^^^§0condary School, Tamta, Distt. ;ffc->'fl-^"5:/.?-". . .„ „ , %^..-p^t-'"" Jashpur (C.G.) ^•""y.iV?^^-" &'° RESPONDENTS l»v VERSUS 1 / •^^.^ €^^"- %fr- ' o&'" State of Chhattisgarh, through, Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Dau Kalyan Singh Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner, Department of,- Tribal Welfare, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare, District Jashpwn-. Nagar (C.G.) 4. The Principal, Government (Tribal), Higher Secondary School - Tamta, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH ATBLLASPUR Pctitioner Rcspondents Petitioner Respondents EtitiDner Respondcnta W. P. <s] No. 5833 of 2006 Ashok Kumar Ram Versus State of ChhattisgaA & othcrs W. P. (s) No. 5836 of2006 Awdhesh Kiunar Tiwari Versus State of Chliatlfegarh & ofhers W. P. (st No. 5835 of2006 Anant Kumar Paikra Vcrsus Stetc ofChIiattisgaria. & others Sia^e Bench: Honlate Mr. Justicc Satfah K. AenUxotrl. Shri A. N. Bhakta, Advocate for thc Petitioners. Shri Ufharsh Venna, Govt. Advocate for fhc State/rcspondcnts. ORDBR (30th Octnber, 2006) Thc pedtioners are workii^ as Upper Division Teachcrs/Assistant Teachers in the govemment schools. In fhe coursc oftheir services as Upper Dwraion Teachcrs/Assistant Teachers, fhe pcttttoners havc obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. examination certificates on fhcir own expenses before 1.3.1999. Writ Petition (s) No.s 5833/2006, 5836/2006 and 5835/2006 are bcing disposed ofby this common oider as fhe facts and question oflaw iavolved in fhcse petitions are common. According to leamcd counsel for fhe pctitionera, fhe petitiDners are entifled to two advance increinents ia vicw of the dccismn of this Coiut in fhe casc of Yashwant_Kumar Bharadwai Vs^ Mgmcioal CorDQtation, Dura and another {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Dvvg and another (Supr^, came to the conchision fhat fhe teacheis, who had bbteined B. Ed. /B.T.I. ^ F.vnmmntinn C^rtificate on thcir own expenses, are covered by fhfi circular dated 24.12.98 (Aimexure P/7) issued by the State Govenuncnt of Madhya Pradcsh. Further in fhe matter of Smt. Manorania.Shrivastawa Vs. State of M.P. and ofhers { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } thc Madhya Pradesh Statc Admmistratiye Tribunal, Giwalior Bench, white consMering thc circular dated l.3.1999 whcrem.,it is provided that the Assistaat Teacheis, who have acquired B.Ed. degree at theu- own cost between 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shall be entiflcd to two advance increinents, reUed on decision in thc case of Rakesh Kumar Shriv^teva Vs. State of M.P. & ofhers passed in O.A.No. 1632/99, decidcd on 12.10.1999 wherein it is observed that fhe circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot bc made appUcable retrospectively. Thus, a tcacher, may bc Assistant Teacher, who has obtamed B.Ed. dcgree bcfore 1.3.1999 is entitled to two advance mcremcnts. It is pointed out by leamed coiuisel appearing for fhe pctitioners fhat fhe fhen State of Madhya Pradesh had filed a Special Lcave Petitk>n against thc orders passcd by fhe Tribuiial and the Hon'bte Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petitmn No. 1999/2000 filed against the order of the Tribunal.. Thcrefoic, fhe directk>n to fhe effect fhat th.e cucular dated 1.3.1999 cannot bc made appUcablc retrospectivefy, passed by the Trit>unal, bccomes final and fhe sanae shaU be applicable to all fhe Assistant Tcachers who have obtained B.Ed./B.T.I. cxamination certificate before 1.3.1999. It is further substantiated by a circular dated 17.10.2003 issued by fhe present State of Madhya Pradesh whcrem fhe circiilar clcarfy states about fhc decision of fhe Supreme Court. L^amed counscl for fhe petitk>nera fiirfher subinits fhat the facts and question of law involved in the prescnt case are squarefy covered by decision ofthis Court in fhe case of Yashwant Kuniar Bharadwaj Vs. Mumcipal Corporation, Dui^ and another (Supra^, to which teamed counsel appearing for fhc respondents fairty 2-^ <x>ncedcs and agrecs with thc avcrment niEule by feamed coiuisel appeamig for tihe petitfoners. Accordingfy, fhe writ petxtfon is aHowed in terma of the order passedt in fhe case of Yashwant Kiuaar Bharadwaj Vs. Muuicipat Corporatk>n, Durg and aaottier (SupfE^, subject to vcrifteation of fhe fact as to whefher fhc petitioners'have acqtured B.Ed./B.T.I.' Examination C^rtificatc on fheir own expcnses as per the cnculars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and further whcfliw fhey havc bcen paid two advancc mcicments or not No oider as to costs. •A<»pyofthis oider be placed on reconi ofconnected mattere. kur Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ;A|