&--&-e^^^1 ^r OZ3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.(S1 NO.^3-^3 / 2006 Petitioner ^6-'. ^•'^ ^•' ..^' .r-yS^- • -fe. \0~.''< .^y y ^ '.^.10' 4-'^ €^ Smt. Anima Bhattacharya, ^ W/o. Shri D.K. Bhattacharya, Aged about 44 years, Asst. Teacher, Govt. Primary School Jamnipali, N.T.P.C. Korba, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) VERSUS Respondent's u ^9^±^ ^^yl-^s' 1. State of Chhattisgarh & Others / Through- The Secretary, Department of School Education D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. District Education Officer, Distt. - Korba (C.G.) 3. Asstt. Commissioner, Tribal Welfare Department, Distt.- Korba (C.G.) 4. Block Education Officer, Katghora, Distt.: Korba (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE WRIT. WRITS. DIRECTION ETC TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. HIGH COURT OF CHHATnSGARH AT BILASPUR Pctitioiier Respondents Petit»ncr Rcspondcnts Petitioiicr Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Respondents Petitioner Rcspondents W,?P. (s) No. 5838 of 2006 : Sint Prabha Mahobia Vcrsua State of ChhattisgaA & others W.P. (sl No. 5839 of2006 T Smt Sarojini Uike Versus Vcrsua State of ChIiattisgaA & ofhcra W. P. (al No. 5840 <rf 2006 Siafc Rcnu Ba]a Diamond State ofCUhattisgarh & ofhera W.P. (s»No. 5841 of2006 Baiu BilasShanna Versus Statc of ChhattisgaA & ofhers W. P; (s) No. 5842 of2006 Smt Archna Sharma Versus State ofChhattisgarh & othcrs W. P. (s> No. 5843 of2006 Smt Amma Bhattacharya ! Vcrsus State ofChhattisgaifa & ofhere And W. P. (sl No. 5850 of2006 Petitioncr : Sairt. KrishnaMandal Versus Rcspondents : StAe ofCUhattisgarh & othere Sln^e Bench: HonT>te Mr. Justice SirtUi K. AgnUiotri. Shri Aml Siu^h Rajput, Advocate for the Petitioners. &hri Utkaisfa Venna, Govt Advocate for the State/respODdents. O R DE R (30A October, 2006) Thc petitioners are working as Assistant Tcachcrs/Uppcr Division Teachcrs ia tfae govenuaent schoola. In thc courae of their aemces as Assistant Tcachet's/Upper Division Teachers, tihc pctitioners havc obtajaed B. Ed. fxnmmntinn ccrtificates on fheir cwn expcnscs before 1.3.1999. Writ Ptetition (S) No.s 5838/2006, 5839/2006, 5840/2006, 5841/2006, 5842/2006, 5843/2006 aud 5850/2006 are beiag disposed ofby this common order as tfaie fiicts and questton oflaw invohred ia fhese pctitions are oommon. AcGonling to learaed counsd for tfac pctitionera, ffae pctitioiicra are entifled to two advance increments in view of the decision of this Gourf ia thc case of Yashwant Kuxnar Bhsadwai Vs. Mumcipal Corporatfon. Durg and axiofher {2006 (II) MPJR-CG 96}. This Court in the case of Yashwant Kuinar Bharadwaj Vs. Miuiicipal Corporation, Diug aad another (Supii^, camc to the concluskm that thc tcachcra, who had obtained B. Ed. Examinatfon CcrtiBcate on thcir own expeaacs, are covCTed by the ciroular dated 24.12.98 (Annexure P/l) issucd by fhe Stata Gcwemmeat of Madhya Pcadesh. Purther in the matter of Smt Manoraina Shrivastava Vs. State gf M.P. and oflicra { 2000 (1) M.P.L.S.R. 136 } thc Madhya Ptadcsh State Admmistiative Tribuaal, Gwalior Bench, whfle considcrmg the carcular dated 1.3.1999 wherrin, it is provided fhat the Assistant Tcachera, who have acquircd B. Ed. degree at fhcir cwn cost bctwcen 23.10.1964 and 7.5.1973 shaH be enlifled to two advaitce incremeats, reUcd oa dccision in tfac case of Ratesh Kuniar Shrivastaya Vs. State ofM.P.& ofhcrs passcd in O.A. No. 1632/99, decided on 12.10.1999 wherein it is obaewcd that tfae circular dated 1.3.1999 cannot be inade appUcabte rettDspectivety. Thus, a teacher, may be Assistant Teachcr, who has obtauaed B. Ed. d^ree bcfoie 1.3.1999 is cntided to two advaiice mcremente. It 1s pointed out by leamed counael appcaring for the pctitioaera that the then State of Madhya Pradcsh had filed a SgcciaUieas'EL 6. Petition t^ainat the oiders passed by the Tribunal and the Hoa'blc Supreme Court disnaissed Special Leave Petition No. 1999/2000 fited against tfae order of the TribimaL Thercfoic, the ducctioa to thc eflfect that the circulardated 1.3.1999 caniiot bc naale applicabte itcttospectivety, passed by the Tribunal, becoines final and the same shafl be appUcabte to aU fhe Assistaat Tcachers who have obtaiaed B. Ed. cxanunatmn certificate bcfore 1.3.1999. It is furtfacr substantiated by a ciroular dated 17.10.2003 issued by the present State OfMadhya R'adesh whcrein fhe cncular cleaTty states about the decision offhe Supreme Court. Leame4 counsel for the petitfoners fiuther submits fhat the fsvcta and questmn of law invohred in the present casc arc squarefy covered j|y decision of fhis Court in the case of Yashwant Kumar Vs. Municipal Corporatk>n, Diu"g arid anollicr (Supt^, to whicffii teanied counscl appearing for the respondents fairty con<»desand agrees wifh the averment intide by teamed couiisel appearing for fhe petitioners. Accordiagljr, the writ. pctitions are allcwcd in tenns of the oidcr passed in the case of Yashwaat Kumar Bharadwaj Vs. Municipal Corporation, Diirg and anothcr (SuprE^, subject to vcrificatna of fhe fact: as to whether the petitioners havc acquired B. Ed. Exaaunation Certificate on their own expenses as pcr fhecirculars dated 24.12.1998 and 1.3.1999 aiid furfher whether fhey have been paid two advaace incrementa or not No order as to costs. Babhi 8. AcopyoftIusoHlerbeplacedonrecordinconnectedinatteTS. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge * r