; C2? HIGH CDURT OF CHEATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT I’ETETION (SE N0. 2285 of2(m3 'PETlTlONERS : 1. Shiv Prasad Thakur, Aged 53 years S/o Shri gbu\% Ramadheen Thakur, AQsistant Tewher, Gfavt. Primaxy School, Jaitgudra District Rajnzmdgaun (CG) 2. Bhunneshwar Rat) Baber, Aged Years, Sm Sé‘u’i Mahattar R40 Babel; AS$i$iai1i Teachar, Gtwt. Primery School” Gucihari, msmct Raipur {CG} 3. Ehhaiya Ram Banjaria Aged 56 Years, S/o Shri Thamwar Ram Bailjari, Assistant Teacher; Govt. Primary School Baadtara Block Bhatapm‘a, Digit Raipm. VERSUS ‘ The State Gavemment of ChhafxiSgarh, Through the Secrgtary, SGhaoi Educatim §epamnem Ministry, DK.S. Bhavan, Raipur {CG-J 2. Director 0f ?ub}ic hastructions, Sta‘w of Chhaitisgarh Pension Eada, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The District Educatien 0%661‘, Rajnamigaan/ Raipm (0G,): WRIT PETYHON UNDER ARTECLE 226 OF THE CON STH"§JTXON OF INDIA SE: Han’hie Sim Satish K. Agnihom. .3. aESPONDEN'l‘S Present: Shri Somkam Verma, Advocate for ihe petitioners. Misa Suniia Jam, Fame} Lawyer {hr the Smtef’rcspendenis. ORAL ORI)ER (Pasged (m Eféay 9f Aprii, 2%8) With the consent of ieamad counSel appearing for the parties, the matter is heaw finally. Lwmgd cnunwl appearmg for the petitioners submits that tbe petitionars were appoiniecB as AssiStant Teacher 01m a fixed pay of Rs 10€3i-. After oompietion‘ oftheir probation period, they were granted regular pay scaie. He §mher submiis that ihe i$sue invohed $11 the case is asto Whother the petitioners are emmgd to regular pay scaie w.e.f. tho (iate of ioitial appointment or after completmn ofprobation yeriod. w -<,., I “ifn" 2%? The issue :inveivatL harem was comidered by tha Madhya E’radesh State Acimmistrative Tribunal, Jaba1pur in (1A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukam Yadu and 56 ofhaa‘s Vs. State of MWP. 8c oihers), wherein it was held mat the similarhy situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scaie W.e.§. the date of initial appointment. The matter was iaken—up to the Hon'bie Supi'eme Court. The aypeai was dismissee by the Hon’bie Supreme Court upholding the cieeision of me Tribune} to the effect that the TeachersfAssistant Teachers are entit1ed to reguiar pay sca1e from date of initiai appointment. 4. Leemed counsei appeaxmg for the nuethioners aiso submits that this Calm, wiajle considering the same issue in Amar Sai Ram & others Vs. State of Chha‘ttisgarh & others (Wf. {3) No. 4725/22GQ6) by order dated 1.9%)06, a‘liowed the petitieners to make a representation along with eopy of the petition and armexures Within a period often days, raésing ail their grievances and in turn the concerned respotxdent was directed to oeoide the representation tn an objective manner within a periori of 30 days from the date of receipt ofthe representation. 5. Accordingly, the petitiorters are granted liberty to make a representation along with a coyy ofthe petition and annexures, Within a period of 10 (lays. raising all their grievaoees and in tum the concerned respondent is directeri to decide the representation, if anyr in accordance with law: on its own merits, Within a perioti of30 days from the date of receipt ofthe representation“ 6. ln View ofthe foregoing, this petition is ciisposed of. No order asto costs. 9/5 Sd/— ‘ Satish K. Agnihotn /’r. 7 ,,, Judge Amit