^^iy ^>w^^^y\y ^..•••"^•'•^/T^>"' .-••"L*^" ...-•"" a.X^'' ^-'' ^y:/ '^ - -*** ^-•" ^ v^^^ ly1/ Single Bench Tayyab Ali Rizvi, S/o Shri Abbas Teacher, about 55 years, , Upper Division Distt.. 1. State of Chhattisgarh School Education Department D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.6.) 2. District Education Officer /". •.t7.^1 3. Joint Director, Treasury, Account & Pension sion, 4. Block Education Officer, Block r- a (C.6.: .^'J.K-^^-^.^ ,*-^A, "^ '•^ps-""-| j ^ ''S€A ^3®H3^^ 'ni. I'T'K'I Tayyab Ali Rizvi Ot WmT,PBriTIOMUSDB&A%TICl<E22S/23"QIi'THB.COSST!TOt!OS_oy Shri K.K.Pandey, cQunsel for Shri Pra?ecn Das, Dy. G.A. for the State. Qrievaace of the petitioner ia tfae present petition is that tl-te petitioner was appointed as Deputy Teacher on a feed pay sca.Ie of Rs. 150 for a period of two years aad after coHtpl.eti.oa of probaaou, he was granted regular pay scale ofRs. 169-300. Conteation of fhe coiuisel for tlie petitioner is th.at he is eatitled tbr reg-ular pay scale with, cffect from. Ac date of iaitial appom.tmeRt and his case is squarely covered wit.h aiim.ber of decisions passed tsy fh.is Court an.d also thc judgm.ent rendered by ihs M.P. State Administi-ative Tribunal, Jabalpur in Q.A. Stt. 374S/S9 (Ueidhv.Sctint Yeidu & SS Ctthers ?s. Stcte ofM.P. Ss Ctthers) wherc in it ba&. been held fhat siinilariy placed teachers are entifled for reg'alar pay scale from. the date oftheir iaiti.sl appointmeE.t. .^ It 1s not disputed fcy bofh fhe parties that fhc raatter was talcen •up toy the State to fhe Apex Court but fhe appeal was also disiaissed by ffae Apex Court upholdnig the decisio-a of the Triaunal to the effect fhat fhe Teacliers/Assistemt Teachers axe entitled for regiiiar pay scale froia the date of their initial appouifanent. In view of the atbove subniission inade bv tfae counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of ia fhe sa.io.e terms i.e. the petitioner is granted libertv to Eialce a rspresen.ta.tion, if so advised, in tfce liglit of the aforesaid juidgDient and the circular dated 5.1.2011 (Aniiexure P/6) aad in taira, the conceraed respondent is directed to consider fheir case on its own inerits and ia its gersuective. If tbe petitioner stailds on fhe sam.e footuig as per order passed by fhs State Adiaiiustrative Tnb'us.aS. iu Madhukant Yadu (suprai and subsequenfly coiife-tiied by fhe Suprenie Court ia SpeciaE Leave Petition (Civu} N0. 6892,/93 by order dated 03.01.95, th,e petirioner mav be entitled to same relief accordinglv. It is expected t'roiu, the State autiionties to pass suite.ble orfer after due scnitiay offhe facts. It is inade clear fhat fhis court has aot expressed any opiiaion on ths inerits of the case and tls.e a.ut]iori.Ur conceiTied woi.ild be at liberty to decide the representatioa. stnctiy ia, accoixtance wiffa law. Sd/- ] Pritinker Diwaker ^ ie ;