PETITIONER : Smt. Rita Kataria @ Rita Bham', W/o Shri Sudhirkant Bharti aged about 35 years, Assistant Teacher Boys Aashram Seepat Road Brlaspur Block Bllha, Dish-let Bllaspur (CG) (WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) (SB: Hon'hle Mr. Sansh K. Aguhotri, J.) Present : 81m Kunal Das, Advocate tor the pannoner Shn M P S Bhatia, Deputy Govt. Advocate for the State/respondents. With the consent of the patties, the matter is taken up for hearing finally; . The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on Nxed pay of Rs. t 1200/4. After completion of two years of probation period, he was granted regular pay scale. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner ‘ submits that the issue involved in the case is asto whether, the petitioner is entitled to regular pay scale w.e.f. the date initial appointment or atter completion of probation period. The issue involved, herein was considered by the Madhya Pradesh Slate Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur in O.A. No. 2745/89 (Madhukant Yadu and ‘56 others Vs. State of M.P. & others), wherein it was held 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 a» “m , 1. HIoH COURT OF CHEATnSGARH AT BILASPUR Writ Petition gS) No 3265 of2008 ‘ VERSUS o Edueauon Department, DKS Bhawan, Ralpur (CG) 2. ‘Comm1ssmner Tnbal Welfare Department, Chhattisgrh, R’aipur (CG). . District Education Officer, BilaSpur (CG). Assistant Commissioner Tribal Welfare Department Bilaspur (CG). ORAL ORDFR (Passed on 30$ day ofdune, 2008) j;ar 1 - 4};, RESPONDENTS : l. State of (,hhattisgarh through Secretary School . Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leaxie Petition (Civil) No. 6892/93. The said petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court upholding the decision of the Tribunal to the effect that the Teachers/Assistant Teachers a‘xe entitled to regular pay scale from date of initial appointment. . In view of the above stated submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the wn‘t petition is disposed of in the same terms i.e-.vethe petitioner is granted liberty to make a representation, if so advised, to consider his case, if he stands on the same footings as per order dated 24.08.1992 by the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal, r Jabalpur, in O.A. No. 2745 of 89 Madhukant Yadu (Supra) and subsequently confirmed by order dated 03.01.1994 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.6892/93 and grant relief accordingly. 4. In view of the foregoing, this petition is disposed of. No. order asto COStS . “iV Sd/- , Satish K. Agnihotri Judge alrr’ m