^p IN THE HTGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BTLASPUR WPISLNQiT-?^ /2011 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS y-,^ z?M' ^>"^-" / €^6<^ ^<Y .y .,y~ ...s .^>"^ ^y- Divya Kashyap w/o Shri Shyam B^s»J[ Kashyap aged about Sl^years Lecturer (Hindi) posted at Govt. H. S. School, Jamnipali, NTPC Korba, Chhattisgarh VERSUS f The Stafe of Chhattisgarh - Through- The Secretary, Department of Tribal Development DKS Bhawan Raipur Chhattisgarh 2. The Assistant Commissioner Department of Tribal Development Korba Diatrict Korba, Chhattisgarh 3. ^ The Principal, Govt.^H.S. School, Jamnipali, NTPC, Korba District Korba, Chhattisgarh. ^••" W^tT PETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTtON OF INDIA 1. PARTICULARS OF THE PETITIONER As per cause title 2 PARTICULARS OF THE RESPONDENTS As per causp title 3. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH_JHE PETITION IS BEING MADE This petition is not being directed against any particutar order but against the inaction of the respondents in not providing .,jl,i. -.-;.<--i4-l-.-,-.^L., ^6 HIGH COXmTOF aBHflmseAIUI AT BIUkSPUR 8B^H€WBy;l«R,JUSTICE NUTniKER DltWAKBR W.P.tSI.HO. S7S^/20ll PB'HTIOKER DwyaKashyap versMs RESPOMfDENTS State of C.<x. 8s Others Shri A.V.Shridhar, counsel for fhe petitioiaer. Sbri Bhaskar Pyasi, P.L. for the State. WMT PBTmOK UMDBRARTICUt 226 OP IWB CXMtSTITOTBOn OFniDML ORDBR (26.09.2011) Counsel for ttie petitioiier submlts tiiat fh.e prfitioner is cntilfcd to benefit of two advaace iacreiaents on account ofshc haviiig passcd B.Ed. examinatton before her appoiatment at her own cast It is submitted fhat fhe issue iavolved ia tlie prescnt petitton 1s no longer res integra aad the same has been fixialfy decided by ttie Hon'bk Supreme Court ia the casc ofAslia Saxena Vs. State of MJ>. & Ots. 2009 (ni)MPJR (Sq 59. It ]B fiirther subBaitted fhat fhis Court has also talcen a steuter view ia its order dated 6.2.2009 passed in W.P.(S) No. 6257/2008. Counsel for fhe petitioners furfh.er subauts that fhe order dated 29.4.2010 passed ia Wnt Appeal N0. 124/2009, whcrein rcfylng upon fhe judgment ofthe Supreme Court in (he case ofAatoa Saxena (supra) and fhe order passcd by fhis Coiut ia another Writ Appeal No. 87/2009, directions have been issued for consideration of fhe case ybr graat of two advaace iacreiaents as per cfacular dated 21.9.1974 issued by the State ofMadhya Ptadesh, afberverificaMon of fhe facl^s pteaded iu the pctition. Counsel for ffae State subniits ftiat case of the petitjoaer wouM also be considered on fhe saDie Unes. -^ "t1 j J/ ~s.w''^i :- 3^.«B' In view of above, tte petition is disposed ofwifh a direction to the respondent authorities to decide fhe c]ahn of the petitioner for graat of two advance increiaents as per circular dated 21.9.1974 issued by the State of Madhya Pradesh after vcrifieation of the facts pleaded iu the petition within a period offoiu- inonfhs ftosi today. It is m.ade clear fhat fhis Court has not expressed any ophuon on Bients offhe case and fhe aufh.ority concemed would be at liberty to decide fhe same stricfly ia accordauce wifh law. ^ / - ^'^w^ ,^^: ^tl 5^e