c^*^ s IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF CHHATHSGARH AT BJLASPUR W.P.fS.lNO. 8-1^ /2010 PETITIONER: <\')fM ^£^y :^yn^y VERSUS ^ RESPONDENTS 1. Shailesh Kumar Yadav S/o Late Shri Ramesh Chandra Yadav, Aged about 44 years, Upper Division Teacher, Govemment Middle School Kalmi, Block Sarangarh District-Raigarh (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh Through: The Secretary, Schobl Educatonal Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The District Education OfBcer, Raigarh, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3. The Block Education Qfficer Block Sarangarh, Distt Raigarh (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT IN NATURE OF MANDAMUS CERTIORARY QR ANY OTHER WRIT OF UKE NATURE ETC. ^ HLGH CQURTOF CHHATTLSGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONER WRIT PETITION (S) No. 812 of2010 ShaiSesh Kumar Yadav. RESPO'NDENTS VERSU8 State ofChhattisgarh & Others Writ Petition Under Articie 226 QfThe Constitution Oflndia SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shri Dhani Ram Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Deputy G.A. forthe State/respondents. (Passed oa 25th day of fsbmary, 2010) With consent, leamed counsel fbr the parties were heard liiially. 1. By tliis petition, fhe petitioner seeks a direction to tlie respondenls to pay two advance increments tromfhe date ofpassing ofB.Ed examinatioi]- oa his own expenses, diirine his service period. 2. Shri Patel, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submils that fhe issue involved in fhe present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena v. State ofM.P. & Ors. as weli as by this Court in the mattei- of Yashwant Kr-mar Bharadwaj v. Mtinicipal Corporcition, Diirg & another^ and Gopesh Kumar Verma v. The State Govt. ofCkhattisgarh and anothe' . .3. Shi-i Patei further submits that the histant petition is squarely covered by the decision as afbrestated. Tiius, the petitioner may be pennittsd to make '2009(u)MPJR(SC)59 22006(1I)MPJP.-CG96^ 37.T(S)No.4130of2005 a representation to decide his case in the light of aforestated decision, subject to verilication ofthe fact asto whether the petitioner has acquired B.Ed certificate on his own expenses during the course ofliis sei-vice. 4. Leamed counsel appearing tor tiie Slafe/respondents submits that in the event, the petitioner makes a representatioii, tlie same will be considered and decided, in aceordance with law and in the ligirt ofthe decisions of the Supreme Court in Asha Saxena (.wpra) as well as this Court in Yashwant Kumar Bharadwqf and GopeshKumar Verma (supra), vvifhin a pei-iod offour weeks from the date ofreeeipt ofthe represeiitation. 5. Iii view of foregoing, accordmg to the leamed coufisel appearing for the petitionei-s, nothing survives in this petition for adjudieation. 6. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. | Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge