v HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR S.B. : HON'BLEMR.SATISHK.AGNIHOTRl.J. WMT PETITION (S) No. 1444 of2007, PETITIONER RESPONDENT8 Barat Ram TatKlon, S/o Shri Siikhdas Tandon, Aged about 40 years, Assistant Teacher, Governmeat Primary School, Chandraaagar, DistrictKorba(C.G.) VEKSUS 1. Stete of ChhattisgaA, Throu^i Ifae Secretaiy, Edueation Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipw (C.G.) 2. The District Education Officer, DistrictKorba(C.G.) 3. The Block Ediication Officer, Katghora, District Korba (C.G.) 4. The Qirector, Public Instroction, Raipur(C.G.). Present: Shri Ahswani Shukl^ Advocate fer Ae petitioaer. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for titie Steto/respondents. ORDER w (Passed on 13ln March 2007) I. The petitioner was appointed on 23.02.1989 as Assistaat Teacher oa a fixed pay scale of Rs. 300/-. Affer completion of <me years of probation, he was granted regular pay scale. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner subnrit Aat tiie issaie involved in tiie case is asto whetber, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. tbe date of initial appointeientor 6om tiie date of comDletion ofnrobation neriod, - ' 3. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Piwlerii Stote Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur m O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 otfaers Vs. State of M.P, & others), wherein it was held that the similariy situated teachers are entitlcd to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. Tbe mattCT was taken-up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Lea-ve Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court uphoiding the decision ofthe TribBaal to fte effect that Ifae Teachers/Assistaiit Teachers are eatided to regular pay scale finm date ofinitial appomtment. 4. Leamed counsel appeariag for fhe petitioner fi.irther subaits 1faat tiiis Court, while considering the same issue in Sushil Tiwari & othws Vs. Stote Govt. of Chhattisgarh & others fW.P. (S) No. 5976 ef 2006) by order dated 7-11-2006; has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. the dste ofinitial appointeient. 5. Leamed couasel appearing for the parties jouitiy submit Ifaat tiris case is squarely covered by tiie decision ofthis Court in the case of Sushil Tiwari & otfaers Vs. State Govt. of ChhattisgaA & otbers (Supra). 6. In view ofthat, this petition is allowed in the same tenss. No order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Anrit