^iM^'i^ ^&M^I^ a>^^^A c^ IN THE HON'BLE HI&H COURT OF CHHATnS<&ARH AT BILASPUR (C.6.) W.P. (S) N0. A$ ot) /2011 PETETEONER RESPONOENTS : . 1. ^i.:^- ^^r"^v'" ^•^^"' ..^' ^ ^ ,.-• ^- / Anjore bas Kurre, Aged about 50 years, S/o Shri Kariyadas kurre Head Master, Government Middle School, bhandhan Block Takhatpur, bistt. Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS State of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, School Education bepartment D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.<5.) The Director Public Instructions Raipur (C.G.) District Education officer Bilaspur, Distt. Bilaspur (C.G.) Joint birector, Treasury, accounts, pension, Bilaspur (C.G.) Btock Education Officer, Takhatpur, bistt. Bilaspur (C.(5.) WRIT PETmON UNDER ARTCCLE 226 OF THE CONSTCTUTION OF INDIA mGH COURT OF CHHATTISGAJKH s B2LASFPR ul S.B.: Hon^ble Shri Manindra Mohan Slirivsyatava, J. PETmONER RESPONDBNTS Writ Petitton t81 N0.2500/2011 Anjore Das Kurre Versus State of Chhafetisgarh and otliers Writ Petltion u/A of tlie Constitution of India Present: - Shri K.S. Pawar, coimsel for ftie petitioner. Shri Y.S. Thakur, Dy. Advocate Qeneral for fhe State/respondents on advance copy. ORALORDBai (Passed on 10«*Ilay, 2011) With the consent of leamed (^unsel for the porties, fhe matter is heard fmally. 1. The petitioner was a^ointed as Trainee Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs. 150/-. After successfulfy cbmpleting the probation period of 2 years, he was granted regular pay scale. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for fhe petitioner subinits that the issue involved in the case is as to whefher, the petitioner is * entitfled to regulsar pay scale with effect firom fhe date of initial appotntaient or eifter completion ofprobation period. 3. The issue involved herem was considered by fhe Madhya Pradesh State Administrative 'Mbunal, Jabalpiir in <S^ ^ '^.^.a,^ l^ Ss / ''%..-.l^ O.A.No.2745/89 {Meuffwkmit Twbt and SG ethers v. State of M*P. & others), wherein, it was held fhat fhe similarfy situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale with effect from ttie date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to ftie Hon'ble Supreme Court in special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by tiie Hon'Ne Supreme Court, upholding ftie decision of ftie Tribimsl to fbe effect that ftie Teachers/Assistant Teacha^ are entitled to regular pay scale firom fhe date ofinitial appoinfem^it 4. Leamed counsel appearing for tlie petitioner furfher submte that fhis Court, whUe considerii^ fhe same issue in Amar Sai Ram Ss Others v. State of Chhattisgarh 8s Othsrs [W.P.(S) No.4725/2006] by order dated 01/09/2006, aUowed the petitioners to make a representation wifhin a period of ten days, raising all fheir grievances. 5. Leamed counsel for the petitioner furttier submits that now fhe State Qovt. has issued an order on 5th January, 2011 (Annexure P-2, wherein, it has been ordered that fhose who have been appointed before 1982 and after 1995 on a fixed pay, are entttled to regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment upon successful completion of 2 years perlod of probation. 6. Accordingly, ftie petitiQner is granted liberty to make a representation raising all his grievances in Ugtit of tfae aforesaid "^s^s judgment and dbrculars dat^i 13.01.2009 & order dated 5.1.2011 (Annexure P/2), and in tura, the concemed respondent is directed to decide the representation, if any, in accordance with law, on its own merlts, withln a period of fteee monfhs from the date of receipt of the representation, subjeet to veriflcation ofthe facts. 7. In view of fhe foregotng, fhis petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. Sd/- Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge Praveen ^H^