SINGLE BENGH ^ IN THE HON'BLE HI&H COURT OF CHHATTCSSARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETETION (S) N0...6.6../.37201Q PETCTIONER RESPONDENTS 1. Smt. Te Kuman' Patel wife of Lawin Patel, aged about 41 years, (U.T.D.), R/o. village Padigaon, Block Pusour, District Raigarh, at present working in 6ovt. Pre- Middle School, Padigaon, Block Pusour, District Raigarh (C.6.), VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh, Through : The Secretary, Education Depart- ment, &.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.6.), 2. bistrict Educatin Officer, Raigar'h, ^"^•W District Raigarh (C.6.), AB^^ j-s^7--^"^6.-' 3. Principal, Higher Secondary School, ,.''•''',t'*"' ..••''"' Padigaon, Block Pusour, District f^^'.-^' "b.'' .^~^ s'-' ••^" Raigarh (C.6.) WRIT PETETEON UNDER ARTECLE 226 OF THE COUNSTITUTION OF INDIA TSET ^||<i||c)A|, »ti1yi(o, fsKriwy ..U-...(?..^..^;..!a.'?n...Lc£. an^T TR?7 (li°i{j»<^) sn^i ^T R-IJ+. ^W 3TT^?F ?h*Hich yRITWHfpI ait?t SB : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PR 21.10.3010 Shri R.S.Patel, coiinsel for Siat. Smita Ghai, P.L. for tfce Counsel for the petitioner| entitled to benefit of two advaucl haviag passed D.Ed. examiiiatioj own cost. it is subxaitted that fht petition is no longer res integra decided by the Hon'ble Suprei4 Saxeaa Vs. Stafee of M.P. & Ors. It is further submitted rht siuular view ia its orier dated O 6257/2008. Counsel for the peti| ord.er dated 29..4.2010 passed wherein relyuig upon fhe judgniej case ofAsha Ssxena (supra) aad) ui another Writ Appeal No. 81 issued for consideration of the iucreiiieuts as per circular date(| of Madhya Pradesh, afier verific; petition. Counsel for fhe State would also be considered on ffae <:hl<l^4ll HiM<rff ^T fsx^l <F>l^i< ^aiRman^n the petitioner. Ste.te. submits that fhe petitioner is b iacrenients on account of he p. after her appoiiitinent at her issue uivolved ia the present an.il the same has been finauy Court in the case of tt fhis Court has also taken a ..2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. tioner further subinits that tlie n Writ Appeal N0. 124/2009, offhe Supreme Court in the the order passed by fhis Court '/2009, directions have been :ase for graiit of two advaace 21.9,1974 issued bv fhe State tion of fhe facts pleaded in the subjiuts that case of fhe petitioner iame lines. agpnf JEYjBMia .I3?[UpUd -/PS •qBi|g jo pousd B uitpiM uoT^ttad aqi. JSIJB qsapKij BAqps^ jo jBinojio jad se s^aaxnaioTii a; 3Tp JO HIIBp 3Ift 3pI03p 0^. 831+1 B qiTA jo pasodsip si K^UEhEjlE^ >ljt>toj> (?>&J {• lUhlh l-y»U[>>ltb •SBpoi tao-g s3(33Ai ^qSra |ui p3pB3ld SfSB} 3tp JO UOp.BOTjU3A sift Aq panssi 172,6T'6'T£ pat^P titBApB o&vf. jo ^irejg joj jauo^i^ad Ej.TjioTp.nB ^uspuoclss-i 3LR oi. ao^oanp UOItI^SCt 3Tft 'SAOqB JO A3IA UJ kbiio Baj»>teii»a IBIktlS l.tbltc' IhU tbll-b] li^llf (h^b^teL) *teh l^llf ON p^----^-^-^-:j-yr--^ >T;m^tsJ '°>l>ft|h®'hWMh- !&£. 8Z.—3H-D;