^ H)GH COURTOF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR PETITIONERS W.P.(SlNo. 6887 of 2007 1. Manav Das Tandan, S/o Shri Ghursen 13as Tandan, Age about 60 years, Assistant Teacher, Village - Patanaka|M, Post Kheda, Via - Nandghat, Tahsil - Navagarh, District Durg (C.G.) 2. Ganesh Ram Nashine, S/o Shri Motilal Nashine, Age about 54 years, Assistant Teacher, Govt. Primary School; Ghotiyapani, Block - Bagbahara, District Mahasamund (C.G.) Versus 1 State Government ofChhatti^arh, Through:- Secretary, Tribal & Education Department, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 2 District Education Officer, District Durg/Mahasamund (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTFTUTION OF INDIA RESPONDENTS ^.. Appearance: Shri Somkant Verma, counsel for the petitioners. Shri Ajay Dwivedi, Panel Lawyer for the State on advance copy. ORAL ORDER (20.11.2007) 8UNIL KUMAR SINHA. J. Heard. Leamed counsel for the petffioners submits ftat the issue involved in the case is as to whether the petitioners are entitted to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment or from the date of completion of probation period. He submits that the Issue invoh/ed herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A.No.2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and others Vs. State of M.P. & others), wherein, it was hetd that the similarly situated teachers are entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date of initial appointment. The matter was taken up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petih'on was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding Uie decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/ Assistant Teachere are entitled to regular pay scale from the date of initial appointment. W.P.rSl.No.6887 of2007 Learned counsel for the petitioners further submte thnt this Court, white considering the same issue in Ram Kumar Sahu &others Vs. State Govt. of Chhattisgarh & another C/V.P.(S) No. 813 of 2007) by order dated 12.2.2007, has granted regular pay scale w.e.f. ttie date of initial appointment. Learnedcounsel for the parties jointly submit that this case is squarely covered by the decisfon of this Court in the case of Ram Kumar Sahu and another (Supra). In view ofthat, this petition Is altowed in the same terms. However, this order shall be subject to all verifications made byttie Stateregarding facts pleaded in the peUtion. —^ Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Shyna