@ CD IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) Nofawowo“ PETITIONER: Hirde Lal Sahare S/o Shri Ram Lal Sahare, aged about 61 years, Head master, Govt.Middle School Tengana Barpara, Block Gurur, Dist-Durg (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : l The State of Chhattlsgarh through the Secretaiy School Educatlon Department Mantralay at D K S Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2. The Commissioner, Public Instructions, Chhattisgarh, Raipur (C.G.) 3. The District Education Officer, District — Durg, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR SB : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRITINKER DIWAKER w.P.gsy.No. 7803/201 1 Shri S.K.Thomas, counsel for the petitioner. Shri CQandIesh Shn‘vastava, P.L. for the State. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTXTUTION OF INDIA ORDER (16.12.2011) Grievance of the petitioner in the present petition is that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher (Trainee) on a fixed pay scale of Rs. 100-150 and after compietion of probation, he was granted regular pay scale of Rs. 169—300. Contention of the counsel for the petitioner is that he is entitled for regular pay scale with. effect from the date [of initial appointment and his ease is squarely covered with number of decisions passed by this Court and also the judgment rendered by the M.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. Na. 2745/89 (M'adhukant Yadu'& S6 Others Vs. State ofM.P. & Others) where in it has been held that similarly placed teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. It is not disputed by both the parties that the 'matter Was taken up by the State to the Apex Court but the appeal was also dismissed by the Apex Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers are entitled for regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment. In View of the above submission made by the counsel for the parties, the petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e. the petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation, if so advised, in PETITIONER Hilde Lal Sahara Versus RESPONDENTS State of Chhattisgarh 85 Others the light of the afomsajd judgment and the circular dated 5. 1.2011 (Annexure P/ 1) and in tuin, the concerned respondent is directed, to consider their case on its own men‘ts and in its perspective. If the petitioner stands on, the same footing as per order passed by the State Administmtive Tribunal in Madhukant Yadu (supra) and subsequently confirmed by the Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) NO. 6892/93 by order dated 03.01.95, the petitioner may be entitled to same relief accordingly. It is expected from the State authon'ties to pass suitable order after due scrirtiny of the facts. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the authority concerned would be at liberty to decide the 1epresentation strictly in accordance with law. Sd/— Pritinker Diwaker i i i i i Judge