‘n %g[e$ H%f£H COUR‘V OF BHHATH$G RW 8!M$?UE Writ Pefiiion ($§ W63 0’? 2008 Radhey VaHabh Tiwari, Sic. Shri Dwarika Prasad Tiwari, aged abgut 45 yearsx Assistani Taaches“ Government Giris Primary Schcoi, Sakarya, Bicck Takhamur, Bistr‘mt Eiiaspur (CG). Peiktioner Versus Resncndents 1) State of Chhamsgam thiough Secreiary, Schoat Education Bepadmeni, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raépur (CG), 2‘, The Direcdtor. Pubiéc mstrumion, Chhattisgam, RaipuNCG)‘ 3‘; Dé$triet Educatbn amen Eéiaspur (CG). 4) Bkmk Education omcers Takhatpur, District Bi?aspur (CGy {Writ Petition under Amme 226 cf the Constituticn of mdia) $3: Hon’bie Mr. Saiish K. Agnihom, J. Wegent ShH Kunat Da5, comma far the'petitéoner. Shi‘i Satish Gupta, Govt #‘xdvocate fer the 3tate. 9%m. 0R§§ER (FaS$ed on 14.3.2GO8) The petit‘mner was initiam/ ampamted on 9—1 24 §8i as A$sisiant Teacher on a Wed {say scaEe of Rs SOOI— far me period of inétiai Mo years. After comp§eihon of pmbatian, the petEiioner was granted reguiar pay ecaie of Re. 5451— on 1-7-1 g83. « 2) The question ”cf !aw invoived herem asto whether {he petitiuner is entittee t0 reguiar eav scaie with effect fram the date m‘ 'métiak agapaintmem or from the date of ocmp€etion of probakion period. 3) Learned oounse; appearmg fr the petit§oner as weii as for the Staieirespondente iomiiy submik fnat the facts and question of taw invoWed in the oetmon are the same to that of Writ Petition (S) Ne.5§76 of 2036 (Sushi: ’T-iwari & o‘thers Vs. 5ime of Chhattisgar‘n & others), whEoh was ahoweo‘ 22;r ’ vide crder dated 7412068. Learnad counse? fwther submit that this peim‘on may be disposed of in the same terms‘ 4) m View of me above~stai$d submission maa’e by learnecf wunsek Eppearing for the parties, the writ petéticm i3 aEEowed 3n the same team 316., the petitiener is entitled to reguiar pay scaie with effect from the dafe 3f miéiai agpcintmem, subject’to verificatian of the facts. No urder asio costs. \ ~ Sdl— ‘ ‘3 Satish K. Agniho’tn H Judge i i £1". ,-w x.