@sNt*t-fc IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR W. P. (S) No."^<S^^> 12010 PETITIONER RESPONDENTS <?' .^•' ^. A?MS/ "^x^7 'u'--"'^/vv'"' ^wy ^'Smt. Maalti Kashyap w/o Shree Saamnath Kashyap, aged about 34 years, presently posted as Upper Division Teacher at Governraent Post Metric girl Hostel Dharampura. Tah. Jagdalpur District Bastar. (C.G.) VERSUS 1. State of Chhattisgarh, Through-Secretary, Departraent of Tribal Welfare , Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. ^Conimissioner, Department of Tribal Welfare Jagdalpur, District Bastar. (C.G.) 3. Assistant Commissioner, Departraent of Tribal Welfare Bastar , District Bastar , (C.G.) 4. Treasury Officer, Treasury Acconut and Pension, Jagdalpur District Bastar. (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. I-HC-22 ysg "l||t|ld'il, sSfll'M'ls. fafcll'My 31T^T TR^ ^...^.•:.fc.K>J....fi^^l0 »ira«fraitiich fq^ST' sn^iqii W\* sn^v ipiwgftg sn^rTCnwsfeT SB^:_HQ?i'BLE_MR.JOSTICEPRJTIJIKBRDIWAKER 05.12.3010 Shri Sanjeev Kumar Sahu, ooi Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L. for the Counsel for the petitioner entitled .to benefit of two advancel having passed B.Ed. examination cost. It is submitted that the issue no longer res integra. and the samej Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case & Ors. 2009 (EIIjMPJR (SC) 59. linsel for the petitioner. Btate. jsubmits that the petitioner is increments on account of she Fter her appointment at ber own jnvolved in the present petition is has been finally decided by the tf Asha Saxena Vs. State of M.P. tHis It is further submitted that view in its order dated 6.2.2009 p4.i Counsel for the petitioner furtherl 29.4.2010 passed in Writ Appeal upon the judgment of the Supreme (supra) and the order passed by this| 87/2009, directions have been issu^i grant of two advance increments issued by the State of Madhya pieaded in the petition. Pradesh Counsel for the State subnti would also be considered on the sant' In view of above, the petition| the respondent authorities to decid' grant of two advance increments ttiT^^I'iill'I iTFT^t' ^ t^ft •(J^ftri.R ^7 SlPtTO 3II^?I Court has also taken a similar jissed in W.P.(S) No. 6257/2008. submits that the order dated |NO. 124/2009, wherein relyinj Court in the case of Asfaa Saxeaa Court in another Writ Appeal No. for consideration of the oase for ^s per circular dated 21.9.1974 |esh, after verification of the facts lits that case of the petitioners .e iines. is disposed of with a direction to .e the claiin of the petitioner for as per circular dated 21.9.1974 c^ J (•r.AyfKp, '"^ ' '^ ''*£?^ 1,XI-HC-22 ^sEfffei S •^ ~v:^:'" .w '^,...- ~''"1'^-^ '• "iti®,"*-"'-'' 7SI •^W\v(^, siTfl'M'ld. f'Kll'My sn^T^TTsra? -V-Pl^^ £Yo-7=gs/fc, Shllch" """""""""""""'W^ 200 HWWI Shllch f^^sr' sn^i^r R[-ii<4i 3ni?a ?n^i<^i ^Tfta sn^i ^giwHfid issued by the State of Madhya Prac^es pleaded in the petition within a periojd It is made clear that this Couh: on merits of the case and the authoifity to decide the same strictly in accorddnce cht<ii<t<fti ^iH(rii'^ ^s^ •i^t-^.K ^i'sipOTan^i sh after verification of the facts of eight weeks from today. has not expressed any opinion concemed would be at liberty with law. Sd/- Pritinker Diwakar Judge I '.?T^ ^•?:7