IN THE @ mgie amen HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF WP. (S) No ......H .5.E\Q...’[.2011 CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR C.G. ' M CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR R ISSUANCE OF WRIT OR MANDAMUSIDIRECTION OF OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT. PETITIONER é’hudhakar Barik, S/o Shrj Indrajeet, w \ Aged 51 Years, ‘ ”w gg‘x I W\ .v" ............ ............... 4 \vv w Y‘es" ............. U.D.T., Middle School, Rasoda, Basna, District Mahasamund (C.G.) ¢axaMi g VERSUS KR $€g&% w» N Through e State — The Govt. of Chhattishgarh, €§/" \ @jx Secretary, School Education Department, D.K.s. Bhavan, Raipur (c.G.) (2) District Education Officer, Mahasamund, DiStrict Mahasamund ( C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE \ x @ HIGH COURT OF CHEATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE MMIIQDRA MOHAN $HR1VASTAVA W.P.(S! N0. 4540g2011 PETITIONER Shu dhakar Barik Versus RESPONDENTS State of CG. 8r. Othcrs WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 2261227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF . INDIA A earance: Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for thE petitioner. Smt. Smita Ghai, P.L, for the State] respondents. ORAL ORDER (1 1.08.201 I} Thc petiu'oner was initially appointed as Teacher on a fixed pay of Rs. 100. After completion 0f probation paniod, he was granted mguiar pay scale of Rs. 169-300. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the issued involved in the case is as to Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale with effect from the date of initial appointment or after completion of pmbation period. The issue involved herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and 56 Others v. Others), wherein it was held that the simil the date of initial the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The appeal was dismissed by the H Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled to regular the date of initial appointment. Counsel for the petitioner further submits that this Court, while considering the same issue in Amar Sai Ram & Others Vs. State of Chhuttisgarh & Others, W.P.{S) No. 4725/2006, by order NO. State 0f Mm. & arly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale with en'eet from appointment. The matter was taken up to on’ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the eEeet that the pay scale from @ “dated 01.09.2006, allowed the petitioners to make a representation Within a pen‘od of ten days, raising all the gn'evances. Accoxdingly, the petiu’oner is granted libsrty to make a representation raising all the grievances in light of the aforestated judgment and onier dated 27.12.2008 (Annemxre P/7) and in tum, the concerned respondent is directed to decide the lepresentation, if any, in accordance with law, on its own mem‘ts, within a period of thlee months iiom the date of receipt of the representation, subject to Veridcation of the facts In View of the foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. 7*” sal- H Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Judge