^?^'i:^setst;;i !S^Wv ..s1 y f •;€^10^2— IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT Bll.ASPUR CHHATTISGARH W.P.fS) No. s /2007 PETITIONERS ^^w^ \i&^' -^^ ^ Arun Kumar Bhagati S/Q Shri J&y nath Ram Bhagat, aged about 34 Years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Middle Schoot, Gamhariya, Block JashpurNagar, Distt.- Jashpur (C.G.) RESPONDENTS VERSUS /y- : J. StateofChhattisgrh, Through- The Secretary Department of Tribal Welfare, D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur (C.G.:)., ..:::'..:';:':,,::;:.^ .. , CommissiQnerTribalWelfare, ,Ghhattisgarh ©ovt.Raipur 4: 3. Assistantl©ommissj6ner. Distt.JashpiiR^.CSt.) Block—Eciycatjon ©ffieer, Block JasHpurNagsir , Distt. Jashpur (C.G.) WRITJ'ETITION UNDERARTICLE 226 OFTHECONSTITUTION QF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF SUITABLE_ DIRECTlON ETC.TO DO.JUSTICEINTHEiyiATTER. '•w'."'-',S-fJ"'S!:iW''WS'SKi ^;;;^^^^^^ c HI6H ^XJRT OF CHH^CTTIS&fUtM ,AT BILASRJft W P(S)No 83i<tf2007 Petitkmer Arun fainwr Hwgat Versus tespondents : State of Chtettisgarhond olhers SB: Hon'bteAAr. .TusticeSatish K. Agnitwtri. J 1 • . . , Present: AAr. Anil Singh Rajput, Advocate forlhe petitioner. Mr. Sotish Supta, t>y. 6ovt. Advocorte for the Stnte/r^ondCTts. ORDER (Passed on 1tiis 12tli 6<iy of February, 2007) 1. The |wtitionerwas appointedon 30.6.93 (Annexure P/t) ns Assistont Teacher on fixed poy seate of Rs. 1200/-. Afl'er compfetion of -two years probation, he was granted regular pay senle of Rs. 1200-40- 1440-50-2040/-. 2. Leamed counsel a^sBi'mg for •the petitk>ner submits thut Ihe tssue mvolved in thes case is asto whether the petitioniBr is entitted to reguhr pay scale w.e.f. •the Art®of mitjal c^wintinent or (rfter compfetion of probatkm period. 3. The issue invoived. herein uns considered fay Ihe Madhya Prodesh State Administrative Triburwt,,Jaba^ur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Atedhukant Yadu and 56 oltwrs Vs. Stoite of M.P. & othws), wherem it was hekl that the simihrly siluuted tnachers are entttled to regular pay scate w.e.f. 'the date ef hitfal (ppointment. The matter was taken-up to the Mon'ble Supreme Court. The a^eal »»as dismissed by the Mon'ble Supreme Courl- upholdin9 "the decision ef the TFibimal to Ihe effect •that •the Teodiers/Assistant Ttsoehers areentitled to regular pay scate fcom dotte of initial oppontment. 4. Lenmed counsel qipearhtg for •tfie petitioner further submits thdEt Ihis Courf,wAiite considering the some issue 1 Har Prosud (Surre ond otiwrs Vs. State of Chhorttisgarh & o-thers Wf. (S) No. 5191 of 2006) byorder dated 3.10.20106, has 9ronted regularpoy sonte w^.f. •the date of initial cppomtment. 5. Leamed counseloppearing for the parties jointly aibmit ihait ihis case is squarely cowred by the decision of •this Court m -rtw case pf l-1ar Prosad l&irro onrf o-thers Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & oltwrs (Supra). Bablu -4 6. In view of •that, this petition is altowed in the snme terms. Nooi'der astocosts. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge