of’tM/ @7 @ 1N THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BEASPLR W.P. S NO. J [2010 §EW§EE gg PETITIONER Phulsai Dhruv Slo ifkttmmm g] a; MKW:mamm Aged about g years Uppar Division teacher, Government School Tamta, Vilma khand- Pauhalgaon DisttJashpur (C.G.) VERSUS 1. (State of Chhaxtisgarh through Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) RESRONDENTS : 2. /C6mmissioner 3 Tribal Welfare Jashpur, Distuashpmce.) 3_ Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfaxe Jashpur, DisttJ ashpul(C .G. l1. Joint Director, Treasury Account & Pension Jashpur, Distt.Jashpur(C .G.) HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) NO.1321 OF 2010 (Writ Petition under Articie 226/227 of the Constitution af India) .- Single Bench : Hon‘hle Shti Satish K Agnihotri‘ J, Present :- Shri Deepak Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. t - Shri A.V. Sridhar, Pane! Lawyer for the étate. t ORDER (ORAL) - (Passed on this 29‘“ day of March 2010) h - 1) ‘ With the consent of teamed counset appearingior the parties, i the petition is heard finally. By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to pay two advance increments from the date of “passing of B.T.l. examination, on his own expenses, before r entering into service. Learned counsei appearing for the petitioner submits that the issue involved in the present case is no longer res integra as the same has been considered and decided by the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena v. State ofMP. & Ors.’ as wait asby this Court in Yashwent Kumar Bharadwaj v. Municipal Corporation, ‘ Durg and anotherz and Gopesh 'Kumar Ven'na v. The State ‘Govt. of‘Chhattisgarh and another? r i 2mg (m; MPJR (so) 59 2006 (u) memos 96 r .7 r. \ 3WP (S) No 4130 or2005 , / \ PETITIONER Phulsai Dhruv Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh & Others r4) Learned counsel further submits’that the instant petition E ,‘ squarely covered by the decisions (supra) as aforestated. Thus, the petitioner may be permitted to make a representation tot. ‘- udecide his case in the light of aforestated decisions, subiect to . " verification of the facts. « 5) Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that in the , event, the petitioner makes a representations, the same wiil be considered and decided, in accordance with taw and in the tight _ of the decisions of the Supreme Court in Ashe Saxena (supra) '~ as we" as this Courtin Yashwant Kumar Bparadwaj (supra) and Gopesh Kumar Velma (supra), within. a period of six weeks a o from the date of receipt of the representation.- ) Y) 6) In view of foregoing, according to the teamed counsel appearing for the petitioner, nothing survives in this petition tor ‘ V. adjudication. 7—) Accordingiy, the writ petition is disposed of. i 7 SN- , SAT1SH K. AGN‘HOTBI ‘ ‘ Judge '4 I Gowri r