"•^•a^^WSiSSSKSiW HI6H COUKT OF CHHATTESeARH ArBB.A&W W.P. fS) Ne. 2097 of 2007 Petitioner Versus Smt. Ratna Mishra W/o 9\ri S.&. Mishra Age obout 90 yecrs, Ass'isiwrt Teocher, $ovt. Primary Sdiool, 5ec. 9, Bhilai Nogor-, Block- Durg. Oistt. - Durg (C.©.) 1. 3. Chhattfsgarh, 'nvou^n Secretary, Triba! Weifare Department & Educoticw bepartment, &.K.S. Bhuvan, Raipir (C.6.) District Educatton Officer, Durg (C.ft) Siock Education Officer, t>urg (C.e.) !; Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish K. Aaniho'Sri, J Presents Mr. Somkant Vermo, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vinay Pandey, Pane! Lc »yerfor State/respondents. OR&ER (Passed on this 4th t)ay of Apri), 2007) 1. The question of lati' invofved her'ein ceto whether the petitioner is entitted toreguiar.pay scate w.e.f. the date of initia! appomtment or from the date of comptetion of probation pen'od. 2. Learned counsei appeariry for the petitioner as well as for the Stute/respondents jointi'y submit that the facts and questton of tuv invoived the present writ petition are the same as to that of in W. P. (5) No. 5976/2C06 (Sushil Tiwari end others vs. State ©overnment of Chhattisgwh & other-s), which was aHowed vide order dated 7.11.2tt36. ".-.r ^.^^L^'^^f^f^t^V^??"t- ^'~t- 3. In view of the above-stated submjssions made by learned counsel for the parties, the writ petitfon is atlowed in the same terms. order as to costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotn Judge 'hdivr