W C p/mL IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR £13. No. 16 Fr’} moo? (s34 PETITIONER S/o Shri Bhuvneshvar Prasad Tiwari, Aged about 41years, R/o Jorapara, Sarkanda, Bilaspur (C.G.) Am'] Tiwari VERSUS RESPONDENTS 1‘ State of Chhattisgarh , Through Secretary , Education Department , D.K.S. Bhawan Rajpur (C.G.) Director of public Instruction Pensionbada Raipur (C.G.) 7 \\ WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226OF THE \\ COUNSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (5) No. 1073 of EOOI Pe'rifioner : Anil Tiwar‘i Versus S‘fafe of Chha'r'i'isgarh & ané'i'her Rasponden'i‘s Singie Bem’h: Hon'bie Mr. Jusiica Sui-53h K. Agriihofri. Mr. Kumaresh Tiwar'i, Advocate for fhe pew-inner. 5min Anju Ahuja, Depu'i'y Govemmen'f Advoca’re for fhe Stew/respondents. ORDER (Passed on fhis 26“ Day of February, 2007) Laarned counsei appearing for 1’he pefi‘rioner submi'fs fhai' ‘Hfia pefifiuner is warking as Lee'l'ur'er. The pe'i'i'i'ioner obi’ained B. Ed. Examina‘fion cerfifica're er? 2—9—1995, on his oum expenses. Léar'ned counsei appearing for ‘i'he pefi'rioner‘ Submi'i's 'i'hai' +he quesiion involved, herein asTo whe‘iher The Teacher, who obfained' B, Ed. Exomina‘iion Cerfifica'i’e on his own expenses is en'ri'i'ied 1’0 'i’wo ativance incremen‘fs. According To learned counsei for fhe pe‘fi‘i’ioner, The pe‘i'i'fioner is erri’i'fied fo fwo advance incremen'fs in view of fhe decision of fhis Cour? in fhe case of Vashwonf Kumar Bharodwoj Vs. Municipoi Corporafion, Burg and another {2906 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Cour? in The case of Yashwanf Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporafion, Burg and onoiher (Supra), came fo fhe conclusion fhaf fhe feochers, who had ob'i‘ained B. Ed. /B.T.I. Examino'fion Cerfifica’ie on ‘iheir own /2/ expenses, are covered by we circuiar da‘fed 24.12.98 issued by ‘i’he Sfa'fe 5avernmeni‘ of Mudhya Prudesh. Leamed counsei for ‘i’he pe'fifioner furfher submi‘fs 'l’ha‘i’ +he facfs and quesi'ion of law involved in ‘H‘Ie presen'f case are squarely covered by decision of fhis Cour-1' in ‘fhe case of Vashwanf Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corpomfion, burg and anofher- {Supm), fa which ieafried counsef appaari'cg fer 'i'he responden'fs fuirly concedes and agrees wifh 'ihe cvermem' made by iearned counsel appearing for fhe pefifioner. Accordingfy‘, The wni'l' pe‘i'i'i'ion is allowed in ferms 0f The crder passed in 'lhe case of Yashwanf Kumar Bhamdwqi Vs. Municipal Carporafian, Dung and ano’i'her (Supra), subjec’r 1'0 verificafion of fhe facf as To whefher f‘ne pe‘i'i’rioner has acquired B. Ed. Examinafion Cerfifica‘l'e on his own expenses as per ‘l’he circulars dafed 24.12.1998 d 1.3.1999 and fur‘i‘her whe'rher he has been paid Two advance r incremen'i’s or not No order as To cosfs. Sd/— I ‘ ‘c r* Yagesh l Satish K.Agnihetri Judge