(ZKQ) wn‘ zoo ma () mmst mWW $sné31 ' 1. Arun uar Soi, Slo Late Shri Jagdish rasad ed bou year pper Division Tche, vt. wn iddle Shool, Champa, iock Bam idih, istt. Janjgir Champa (CG) r i Sl l asad Son, o Late Shti Mohan La Soni, ged bout 52 years Upper Dis Tear, a a , viion che i oi , hih ddie Scho Devri Block Bamanid, Dish. 1. State f Chhatsgar through — The Secretary, ep ent of Educa antray Da m tion Mlaa DK.S a Ru (CG) i 3. Rae ar Prsad Rathore o aaram Rathore, js w a , S/ Dy a out61 year Astan Teache v is School e, Block vagar t a Champa(CG) Jnjgi Versus RESPONDENTS: o hh Bhw n arpr 2. The tt Educan Offce Distt. Janjgir Ch (CG) (Writ Petition nder Ar e 226 of th Constitutin of lndia) u t i e o ’ - -- Shri A.S. Rajput, counsel t petitioners. f r he Miss unita Jain, Pal r or he Statelresponde’nts. Heard. Learned counsel for t itioners submitte that the petitioners were initially ppointed on the fixed p scale of Rs.100/-. They were subsequently granted regular pay scale after 2 years of their appointments. They were not granted regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment as well as fixation of pay scale and seniori according to their initial appointment. in the ma; aqg m W mw m W PETlTlONERSz Km n P g at 56 s, U ear Go To M c B h n D ged b s smt r Got Gir Slvm Nah Dist isric tio r am a S.B. HONBLE SHRI DHIREND MISHRA J. 61 1 2008: S ne La e f t he p t d a a Sam,mim m§qi$ 200 E 3.11% W (W) memirm ' . mmm ' ma mmwj“ ‘1 WY -m§é - QW?“ ammam 17%” $Wmw I similar matters reHef claimed by petitioner has already been granted to the petitioner in W.P. (S) No.6681/2 6 (Smt. Annpurna Shukia V. State of C.G. & 3 others) vide order dated 7-1 2 06. The case of the petitioners is identical ' to that of the petitioner in that w 't petition. He further submitted that he is not I pressing this petition at this sta e, however, the petitioners may be allowed to ‘ make a representation to resp ndent No.1 to give similar treatment to the r petitioners and further direction to respondent No.1 to decide representation ‘ within'specifred period. a vrLearned counsel for t e State/respondents submitted that if the \ petitioners make representation in this regard. the same shall be considered and decided by respondent N in accordance with law Within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the representation, as per law laid dovm in the matter of Smt. Annpurna sh kla (Supra). v made by learned counsel for he parties, the instant petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to make a representation raising all their grievances which are raised in this petition before respondent No.1. ‘Om such representation being made by he petitioners; the same shall be considered and decided by respondent No.1 within a further period of 2 months from the date of receipt of the in 'yiew of the submissi representation. Sdl— i Dhirendra Mishra" Judge Barve l e - 0 o s o