In the Honble High Court of Chhattishgarh at Bilaspur (C.G.) W.P. (S) No. 2006 Petitioner ............ Chandrika Prasad Deshmukh aged 48 years /^ S/0 Shri Deodhar Prasad Deshmukh, Assistant Teacher, Govt. primary School ,Nikumbhata Durg Tahsil & District,Durg. VERSUS Respondent... ... 1. The State Govemment of Chhattishgarh, ^ Through the Secretary, Education Department D.K.S. Bhavan, Raipur (C.G.) /- /--> p^ <^' ^c, ^yw i\{ ^2-The Block Education Officer, /^" ry Durg (C.G) Q^ ,Writ petition under articles 226/227^of the Constitution of .A- India for issuance of writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, CertiorarL Prohibition and pther syitable WRIT or writs^, Order or orders, Direction or directions. XI-HC-78 tTT(fdl Sh*1|cb 3:5g''<41'i<lct<4, »Tn«'l(S,RtMI«y Y 15, ./^.fi.u.^..^.^ ^[200 3<l^!'l ><tt»> (y(g°«^sT) aii^rwf^TO (raT3n^TstiK ?TBTWHf?(1'3n^T 1.12.200e: Shri Somkant Verma counsel for Shri Somesh Bajaj GA for the res[j Petitioner isworking as Teacher if\ =t>i<<Fti41-f ii*i<iTfftecil'<Ri'tdi< ^iari^iran^r the in< petitioner. ondent/State. a Government School. In the course of B.T.I. certificate at his own expenses t1is service as Teacher, he has obtain tlefore 1.3.1999. According to learned counsel for tjie petitioner, petitioner is entitled to two dvance increments in view ofthe decisid yme (2) MP^? - CG 96 wherein it h^ c|btained B-Ed., M.Ed., BTI certificates at| n ofthis Court in the case ofYashwaitf ;umar Blwradwaj Vs. Munidpal corpc|ration, Durg and another reported in s been held that the teachers having their own expenses are covered by the Further in the matter of Smt. nd others reported in 2000 (1) ^dministrative Tribunal, Gwalior Bench (jircufar dated 24.12.1998 issued by the Sf.ate Government ofMadhya Pradesh- >rama Shrivastava Vs. State of M.P. 1PLSR 136, the Madhya Pradesh while consjdering the circular dated .3.1999 wherein it is provided that th]e teachers who have acquired B.Ed. c|eg'ee at thei'r own cost between 23.10 t(vo advance increments, relied on the decision in the case of Rakesh Kumar ^hrivastava Vs. State of Madhya Pr^desh and others passed in Originai 4pplication No. 1632/1999 decided on 121.10.1999 wherein it is observed that the lr( t^acher may be Assistant Teacher, wl le then state of Madhya R'adesh had fil rders passed by the Tribunal and the 1964 and 7-5.1973 shall be entitled to roular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be maijle applicable retrospectively. Thus, a \io has obtained B.Ed- egree before .3.1999 is entitled to two advanced increhients. It is pointed out by the learned ctiunselappearing for the petitioner that sd a Special Leave Petitionagainst the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the XI-HC-78 HIH^II Stl*11<*> 3^'^qm^pr, ®Tl1u<i<p,Ridiyy .^.f/.Q.fc^^P/.6.fc '2-° Wi; 200 3li^?TTSra? ('pi^g^Ef) 3TI^T?iTf^IR> dWSn^T^TTNt ??<nw ofer STI^T Special Leave Petition No. 1999/20(p Therefore, the d'rection to the effert made applicable retrospectjvely, pass^d same shall be apf^icable to all the| B.Ed./BTI certificates before 1-3.1999 dated 17.10.2003 Issued by the pres^nt circular clearly states about the decisic|n Learned counsel for the peti)| question oflaw invoh/ed in the present| the ctecision ofthis Court in the casel which learned counsel appearing for agreeswith the averments made by Accordngly, the writ petition Court in the matter of Yashwant Kuaifnr fact as to whether the petitioner h< expenses as per the circular dated 24| he has been paid two advance increm| t>i<iFci<(1-< '<wCTTffte^<R]'ttfi< ^srf^Tan^r filed against the order of the tribunal. hat the circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be by the Tribunai, becomes final and the Assistant Teachers, who have obtained |. tt is further substantiated by a circular State of Madiya Pradesh wherein the |n ofthe Hon'ble Supreme Court. lioner further submits that the facts and case of petitioner are scyjarely covered by |of Yashwant l^imar Bharadwaj (supra) to |the respondent/State fairly concedes and le^irnedcounsel appearing forthe petitioner. s allowed in terms of the decision of this Bharadwajsubject to verification ofthe is acquired B.T.I. certificate at his ovifn 12.1998 and 1.3.1999 and lurther whether ints or not. No order as to cost. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge P.T.O. r